Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 15 Oct 1997

Vol. 481 No. 5

Private Members' Business. - Case Against BNFL: Motion (Resumed).

Debate resumed on the following motion:

That Dáil Éireann calls on the Government to urgently support the legal case of the Louth Residents Group against British Nuclear Fuels through the provision of the necessary financial assistance towards research and legal costs as well as the appropriate technical expertise and information.

—(Deputy Yates.)

Mr. D. Ahern

I am delighted to resume and to be uninterrupted. What took place here earlier was a disgrace. I apologise if I, in any way, answered the far side of the House and not you. I and a number of other people in my party wanted to contribute to this debate without interruption but unfortunately Deputy Stagg has not covered himself in glory. That follows on from the way in which he behaved when in Government.

I reiterate we have inherited a legacy of indecision and inaction by the previous Government. This Government is fully committed to the principle behind the motion. The Minister of State, Deputy Joe Jacob, the Minister for Public Enterprise, Deputy O'Rourke, who has responsibility in this area, and I have worked tirelessly since the formation of the Government to reconcile the difficulties in this case. The Cabinet has met on at least three occasions to discuss this case in detail. There have been constant meetings between Ministers in the intervening period and constant contact with the residents. Unfortunately a legacy of suspicion has been engendered over the years because of their dealings with various political parties. It is high time we knuckled down and did not play politics with this issue. I do not question the view of any Member in relation to Sellafield and I would expect they would not question mine. My record in this regard is second to none and I challenge anyone to say otherwise.

Since becoming Minister I have endeavoured to do my utmost to assist these people as much as possible and even they would acknowledge that, although relations between the Government and themselves are strained. The Government is prepared to meet them next week in an effort to work in a spirit of co-operation so as to properly establish the research necessary to ground a case against BNFL. A case should have been taken by the previous Government if there was evidence against BNFL but the State and all political parties neglected to take that case. The residents have taken it upon themselves to take that case and we have to assist them. I would be willing to assist them 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

Mr. Callely

I welcome the motion and am pleased the Government has agreed to accept it. So long as I am a Member, this Government will be totally committed to protecting its citizens from the potential harmful effects of radioactivity. This is not an issue on which anyone should wish to score political points. It is a critical issue which is a threat hanging over all our heads and which, without warning, could tragically devastate our country.

I reinforce the views of the Government as expressed earlier by the Minister of State, Deputy Joe Jacob. The Government wishes to be co-operative and supportive of the County Louth residents in respect of their efforts. We must be mindful that we are here as a body to represent the views of the public. To the best of my ability I have always attempted to represent accurately the views of my constituents. I have done so on this issue and in the past number of days I have taken the opportunity to speak with constituents on their views on the nuclear industry and, in particular, their views on Windscale, Sellafield and THORP or whatever other derivative British Nuclear Fuels has put on activities at this location.

No one person to whom I have spoken proffered support for THORP or British Nuclear Fuels' efforts to develop that part of Britain as some kind of a nuclear trash can. We as a nation examined the nuclear power option in the past. We conducted feasibility studies and concluded that the risks associated with such an approach so far outweighed any possible benefits, that as a concept it should be banished, never to be resurrected. Yet within 60 miles of our coastline and less than 30 minutes flying time of our capital city sits one of the greatest monsters of Europe.

We should not be lulled into the false sense of security that BNFL is a highly experienced and professional body that can ensure a disaster will not occur. Accidents occur in all businesses and walks of life on a regular basis. Why should Sellafield be different? The nuclear industry is not. The consequences of a simple accident in the British nuclear industry could have a more tragic impact on the people of this country than the famine of l847 which, even with the recent apology from the British authorities, still leaves a scar on the nation. I am not scaremongering or being over dramatic. Numerous previously unreported serious accidents in the British nuclear industry on Britain's west coast were uncovered only by the BBC and The Scotsman as part of investigative journalism. We are being asked to trust the people in charge of this lethal industry when they regularly cover up mistakes. We cannot stand idly by. We must show tangible support for the four people who have taken this fight to the courts and succeeded. They have shown BNFL that there is legitimate resistance here to the nuclear fuel industry. Fianna Fáil spelt out its commitment on this matter in its position paper of April l997. The Government has started the ball rolling with its commitment to research. We must now be prepared to fund further action as required.

To take on BNFL and eliminate once and for all the threat of nuclear fallout, especially from plants on Britain's western seaboard, STAD has won the right to substantive action against BNFL. There are complex legal and technical issues involved. I would welcome the views of the Attorney General on this issue and on the strategy necessary to win the case on behalf of the Irish people. Until now the people of STAD in Dundalk have fought alone against enormous odds. They have carried a torch for this nation when past Governments failed them. They deserve our acknowledgement and support.

Fianna Fáil has been unambiguous in its objectives regarding Sellafield and her sister stations. We want them closed forever. The acceptance of this motion is the start of the first serious support by any Government for the group concerned. It is my earnest wish that we will see the closure of these potential lethal plants by the end of this millennium, if not sooner.

Miss Fox

I welcome the opportunity to discuss this important issue. I thank the Government for accepting the motion and by doing so acknowledging that the Dundalk residents are justified in taking legal action against BNFL. I do not believe it was ever the intention of the County Louth residents to attract so much political attention. They have stated on many occasions they are not aligned to any political party or person. That is the only position such a group could take. They did not ask Fianna Fáil to specifically refer to them in their environmental policy printed prior to the general election in which it stated that in Government it would ensure the case taken by the Dundalk residents would be fully funded and, if necessary, taken to the higher courts. Fianna Fáil took it on itself to give that pledge and it should now honour its commitment.

The Opposition who tabled this motion can only now afford to make the type of demands it failed to implement during its terms in office. Deputy Gormley, who raised this matter on the Adjournment last week and kindly shared time with me on that occasion, has not been acknowledged in this debate. It was at that point the attention of the main Opposition party was drawn to this matter.

This should not be a political issue. Sellafield is a grave public concern. It affects all our citizens and, more importantly, future generations. I visited Sellafield and the THORP reprocessing plant last August. BNFL is a profit making company which reprocesses nuclear fuel from other countries. It takes nuclear fuel from approximately 30 reactors located in nine countries worldwide and reprocesses their fuel. In other words, it brings the spent nuclear fuel of the world to our doorstep in the interest of making a profit. During this process it ships nuclear fuel up the Irish Sea to the port of Barrow where it is unloaded and taken by train to the THORP plant. It is stored and monitored at Sellafield where it is eventually reprocessed. Such reprocessing means that radioactive materials are emitted and released into the Irish Sea, again in the interest of making a profit.

BNFL is actively pursuing as many contracts as possible. It depends to a large extent on information from the countries whose fuel it reprocesses. Therefore, misinformation from another country could suddenly become our problem. This is a grave concern when a number of heavily populated developing countries, such as India and China, are looking more and more towards nuclear power to provide energy in their countries. I am aware of only one other facility similar to Sellafield and that is located in France. It stands to reason, therefore, that BNFL will increase its business.

The contracts actively being pursued by BNFL are being pursued without the facility of a permanent site to store intermediate radioactive waste due to the wise decision to reject the possibility of NIREX's underground depository. This, combined with the Beaufort Dyke arms incident, does nothing to reassure me the British Government is forthcoming with important information.

I mentioned last week that research carried out by Carmel Mothersill shows a link between genomic instability and low levels of ionizing radiation. This research has been confirmed by renowned scientific institutions, such as the Harvard School of Public Health. These serious matters need to be addressed by the Irish Government on behalf of all our citizens, but unfortunately the silence of successive Governments has been deafening.

I hope the motion is the first of many steps to address the complex problems associated with Sellafield. I will closely monitor progress on the meeting to be set up with the Dundalk residents. Unless concrete proposals are spelt out, accepting this motion will have been nothing more than a token gesture and that is no good to any of us.

Mr. Kirk

This debate is getting away from the real issue. The people who have indicated their willingness to pursue this case against Sellafield are seeking the support of the Government, political parties and other individuals to pursue their case. The basis of the court case should be focused on. Because of the complex issues involved, compiling fundamental scientific evidence is vital to the case. The court case will be doomed to failure unless such scientific information is compiled and that will take some time. The RPII is bound to have a volume of data on this area, but it may be necessary to gather more information. In future meetings between the Minister of State and representatives of the groups I hope concrete arrangements can be made to gather the necessary information and that the difficulty we are discussing can be tackled on a phased basis. I also hope that when the evidence is compiled the next stage can then be considered.

An Ceann Comhairle

I understand Deputies Gilmore, Hayes, McGahon and Joe Higgins are sharing time. I am calling Deputy Gilmore.

Mr. Wright

Will I get an opportunity to speak?

An Ceann Comhairle

No, Deputy. There is no time available.

Mr. Gilmore

I was a member of the Cabinet sub-committee of the last Government which dealt with Sellafield and nuclear issues. I am sorry the Minister, Deputy Ahern, left the Chamber because I wanted to say directly to him — no doubt he will read the Official Report — that he has done very serious damage to Ireland's position in relation to Sellafield and to the case of the litigants. On reflection he should take the first available opportunity to return to the House to correct an impression he has left which will linger for a long time, that the State and the litigants have no case and that there is no scientific evidence on which to base a case. It was highly irresponsible of him to attempt to convey to the House advice given to the Government by its legal advisers about matters, some of which are currently before the High Court, as in the case of the litigants, and about a matter on which the State might yet take a case. He should correct that. If he does not, what he stated here about the advice from the Attorney General will come back to haunt this case, undermine it and the position of this country in relation to the Sellafield issue.

It is highly irresponsible, childish and counterproductive to engage in an exercise of political one-upmanship on this important issue. It is an attempt to have political one-upmanship that has us here tonight. The last Government agreed to financially support the case being taken by the four County Louth residents. Fianna Fáil, for its own reasons in Opposition, decided that it had to go one better than that and announced it would fully fund the case. It has now effectively pulled back from that pre-election promise, but it created an expectation it is finding it cannot fulfil.

There is no greater threat to the security of the people of this island than that from nuclear installations in the neighbouring state of Britain. An accident in any one of those, including Sellafield, has the potential to literally wipe us out. The insidious nuclear pollution and radioactivity from those installations poses an enormous threat to the health, food and environment of the people of this country. It ought to be the job of this House, and whatever Government happens to be in power, to do whatever it can to minimise that threat and ensure the people of this country get the maximum protection from those threats posed to us.

The last Government also inherited the case taken by the four County Louth residents. I was one of the first Ministers in the last Government to meet some of the litigants. It was our view in the last Government that the four residents who courageously took that case should not be exposed to the costs of it or, more particularly, to the enormous costs that might arise if they were to lose it. That is a consideration that must be taken into account in any case. Anyone familiar with court cases will know that costs primarily arise when one loses a case. That is when the question of the awarding of costs arises.

In committing itself to supporting the residents and assuring them they would not be exposed to those costs, it was the view of the last Government that a certain degree of caution had to be exercised so that the taxpayer would not be exposed to effectively writing a blank cheque for the lawyers of BNFL if the worst happened and the case were lost. That was the first consideration. The fundamental consideration was that the residents should not be exposed to the costs of the case.

A second consideration related to the preparation of this case which affects not only the four citizens who are bringing it or their legal representatives, but all the people. It was the view that the best possible case ought to be prepared. That involved a certain amount of legal costs in the preparation of the case for which payment would have to be made. The payment put forward by the last Government was a down payment on that cost, the start of the process. It was not attended by any conditions and there was no question of it being a full and final payment or whatever terminology was subsequently used by the Government.

Another matter was the preparation of the scientific evidence and the carrying out of research. There were aspects to that such as the making available to litigants of the evidence, information and research available to the State at present and the preparation of such additional scientific evidence as would assist the case. In that respect a degree of co-operation was required between the State and the litigants. It was the view of the last Government that the State ought to be released as a defendant in this case. It is my view and advice, if I can be so presumptuous as to offer it, that the State should be released from being a defendant in this case because no matter what Government holds office it will have difficulty dealing with this matter.

It is unfortunate the Government has politicised this issue in a way that is extremely divisive. It should not have done that. Its difficulty with the concept of fully funding the case arises directly from its attempt to politicise it in the run up to the last election. It should depoliticise it. The Minister, Deputy Ahern, in particular, should come back into the House and undo the damage he did tonight by effectively undermining the State's position, that of the litigants and the national case that many of us have been making for years in relation to Sellafield.

An Ceann Comhairle

I now call Deputy Hayes.

Mr. Hayes

I give way to the Deputy from the area.

An Ceann Comhairle

The order of speakers I have is Deputies Hayes, McGahon and Joe Higgins, but it can be changed.

Mr. Hayes

Is it in order for Deputy McGahon to speak first?

Mr. McGahon

I thank Deputy Hayes for allowing me to say a few words on this issue as a Dundalk man. Initially Sellafield was not a priority for me nor for the masses that live in County Louth. Fianna Fáil held a public meeting early in May and including the Deputies and Fianna Fáil personnel, less than 36 people attended. Nevertheless, I plead guilty to complacency about the brooding menace presenting itself to the people of County Louth. I acknowledge Senator O'Dowd's awareness of this menace. He had convened two conferences on the matter in Drogheda.

My awareness of the menace has been heightened by the recent publication of unacceptable statistics by the North Eastern Health Board. These show that the rate of cancer deaths is 15 per cent higher in County Louth. This is unacceptable and I hope this Government will make continuous funding available for the North Eastern Health Board to conduct much needed research into this unhappy statistic.

Deaths from cancer are consistently higher in County Louth and its neighbouring County Down. There has to be a rational reason for this and it is the duty of this Government, through the North Eastern Health Board, to fund a continuous research programme to elicit the facts and to take whatever measures are necessary to eradicate the scourge of cancer. The man on the street has had the uneasy feeling that Sellafield has contributed to this. In 1957 there was the unexplained phenomenon of a discharge from Sellafield which hit St. Louis's Convent in Dundalk. Some years later this resulted in an unusually high proportion of handicapped children born to girls who did their leaving certificate in that year. This too has heightened my awareness of the problem.

Sadly, Sellafield has been used over the years by those in Opposition as a stick with which to beat the Government, none more so than the present Government who raised the matter in the Dáil every six months in the past five years. I would like a consensus with every party uniting to tackle this problem. The four people who have taken the burden of fighting this case upon themselves are courageous. However, the money provided for them, initially by my Government is petty cash. A sum of £200,000 cannot fund the necessary legal expertise to fight this case. This case should be fought by the State. Four ordinary citizens are unlikely to win this case but a State, particularly given our recent eminence in Europe, would have some chance.

Fianna Fáil has been hypocritical in including this matter in its manifesto. It gave a solemn commitment to the people of County Louth that it would fund this court case on an ongoing basis. Now, four months into its term it has done an about-turn. Like Deputy Gilmore I am sorry the Minister who is from the area concerned, has chosen to turn his back on this assembly. During the suspension I told him what I would say here. The Minister, Deputy Dermot Ahern is an accomplished young man and he has a definite future in politics. However, tonight I have to dub him the "Minister for Bluster" because he came into the House determined to pull down the scrum. He frustrated Deputy Stagg who did significant work in his Ministry, attended conferences all over Europe and opposed Sellafield at every opportunity.

Deputy Ahern, and to a lesser extent, Deputy Kirk, must take responsibility for what the people of County Louth were told in that unholy manifesto. As a political cynic, who is sometimes cynical of my own party, I believe that when in Government, a party should be morally and legally obliged to implement promises included in an election manifesto. Fianna Fáil has done a U-turn on this issue and it would not have moved but for the threat by Deputy Fox.

The Government is in a difficult position and political expediency has won the day. This is a shameful example of stroke politics. At a time when the country is condemning this assembly, we need some honesty. We need a united, all-party approach to Sellafield. The State, on behalf of the people should give continuous backing to the four people who had the courage to take this court case on board.

I name the Minister, Deputy Dermot Ahern, not only as the Minister for bluster but as the architect of that inducement in the Fianna Fáil manifesto. He got a magnificent tally of 10,000 votes in County Louth. I was proud of him because there has not been a Minister from Dundalk since the early days of the State. I would like to think he will advance greatly in the world of politics but this has not been his finest hour. He spoke from the side of his mouth when he assured the residents that when in Government, the soldiers of destiny would deliver.

The Minister and the Fianna Fáil party stand here tonight with their trousers around their ankles. They should pull them up as quickly as they can, cover their dignity, honour their commitment and take care of the interests of the people of County Louth and this State. The interest, health and welfare of the people of County Louth should be paramount to the Minister. Political advancement will come naturally, but not by giving bum promises to the people of County Louth.

Mr. Hayes

I congratulate Senator O'Dowd, a member of my party, for the work he has done in this area over the past three to four years. He has informed debate in my party and brought us up to speed with the concerns of the people in County Louth, as was recognised by his constituency colleague, Deputy McGahon. As someone who has proactively helped this campaign, we owe him a great debt and I am sure that in the future, the people of Louth will agree with me.

It is essential we clarify this motion. The Minister said "we are fully committed to the principle of this motion." That is not good enough. This House intends to support the exact motion on the Order Paper and to give to the people who took this brave legal challenge against BNFL the necessary financial assistance towards research and legal costs as well as the appropriate technical expertise and information. It is not the principle of the motion, but its substance, which must be supported. I agree with my colleagues who said it has been a very bad night for this Parliament.

Successes were gained in relation to Sellafield over the past years particularly in the stance taken by the previous Government on NIREX when it courageously went to the planning process and was part of the opposition which ensured that BNFL's ludicrous rock cavern proposal did not go ahead. The ministerial task force established by the previous government was also a success. Both of these were achieved because there was cross party support. The moment we lose that cross party support is when BNFL and every other vested interest which supports the nuclear industry in Britain will laugh at this Parliament. We must adopt a united stance on this issue; I know it is supported by every Member of this House. The kind of histrionics we have witnessed tonight show this House in a bad light and how irrelevant we are to many people in the public who are looking for leadership on this issue from all sides. I encourage the respective spokespersons on all sides of the House to do what they can over the coming weeks to come together on this crucially important issue.

I am on the Seanad record as saying that until we take this message to Britain and win over public opinion there we will get nowhere. One quarter of the entire power source in Britain derives from BNFL and the nuclear industry. BNFL and the nuclear industry is a massive vested interest which has over 15 years of contracts on its books. Their profits over the past ten years exceeded £500 million; that is not peanuts, we are not taking on some small player here.

This issue fits into the idea of the east-west relationship between Britain and Ireland and should be the number one issue on the talks agenda in Northern Ireland. It crosses the Catholic-Protestant, Nationalist-Unionist divide and goes to the heart of the relationship which should exist between Britain and Ireland. Adopting a united stance would say to the British Government that we are not prepared to allow this time bomb to rest on our doorstep any longer. We must approach this issue as a united Parliament; if we do that we will succeed.

Mr. Higgins

(Dublin West): I fully support the motion. As a Socialist Party TD, I salute the residents of County Louth who have pushed the issue this far. It is not the first time ordinary people have had to intervene in the face of the State's dereliction of duty. The State has a primary responsibility to protect its people and should have been providing leadership on this issue for decades instead of forcing residents to lead it by the nose to carry out its duty to the people. Lame excuses may have existed for nuclear power generated energy in the post-war period but, in view of what we now know, it is criminal in the extreme to persist with nuclear fission as a basis for nuclear power and with the treatment of waste nuclear material. Experience shows the kind of disasters which undoubtedly will impend. We do not yet have the same level of proof about the microwave radiation which emanates from mobile phone systems, an issue about which some of us are very concerned, as we do about nuclear power. For that reason, we are rubbished when we advise caution. However, in relation to nuclear fission, we have the evidence of Windscale, Three Mile Island and Chernobyl; we have graphic detail of the risk posed to humanity by nuclear power.

It is a measure of the arrogance of the nuclear industry that it persists with an all-out attempt to develop an industry based on the most lethal substance known to humankind. That is what we are dealing with. This issue is not one which concerns just the people of Louth; it concerns the people of Ireland in general and, indeed, people all over the world. This is an international issue; fallout knows no boundaries. This issue is as serious, if not more serious, than the destruction of the rainforest which is an also an international issue of concern to us even though we are far removed from it.

The THORP plant at Sellafield must be closed down; nuclear fission must be eliminated as a source of power generation and the nuclear industry, particularly the privatised BNFL, should not be trusted. There is a fundamental conflict between its drive for super profits and the safety of the Irish and British people. Any building worker faced with a conflict between profit and safety will, nine times out of ten, allow profit to come first. Last April, BNFL was fined the maximum possible fine of £20,000 for total disregard for safety at its Sellafield plant. We should not only pursue the legal route in this case; there should be a major campaign to lobby public opinion in Britain to win over the millions of British people who are also faced with this threat. We should also lobby the trade union movement in Britain because thousands of workers and their families depend on the nuclear industry for a living. I am reminded of the biblical saying "beat your swords into ploughshares"; we should advocate that the marvellous ingenuity which has helped to create the technology for the nuclear industry should now be redirected constructively away from it and towards human advancement. That ingenuity and the billions of pounds channelled into this industry could be directed towards producing safe, cheap and renewable sources of energy in the areas of electricity generation, transport systems and so on.

The Labour Government in Britain should be held to have a major responsibility on this issue and the Irish Labour Party should use whatever influence it has on it. If the Labour Government in Britain were a democratic, socialist Government it could, instead of aping Thatcherism, lead the movement to close down the nuclear industry there. It could take BNFL and the Electricity Generating Board back into public ownership and management, close down the nuclear generating and nuclear waste processing sectors and reemploy the thousands of workers involved in a planned way in alternative industries. If we approach the ordinary British, working class people, the workers dependent on this industry, in this way and pursue the legal approach to the limit, we could achieve success on an issue crucial to the safety of our people, the British people and humanity as a whole.

Debate adjourned.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

There are 15 minutes remaining in Private Members' Time. It will be decided on the Order of Business tomorrow morning when that 15 minutes will be taken.