1 month ago
38
In moving his motion at last week’s meeting of East Lindsey District Council, Sutton on Sea Green Councillor Robert Watson described its objectives in calling for an early public poll on the prospect of bringing a Geological Disposal Facility (or nuclear waste dump) to Theddlethorpe, East Lincolnshire, as ‘simply a matter of democracy.’
The motion, backed by Independent Councillor Travis Hesketh representing Theddlethorpe, deliberately omitted any favourable or negative opinion on the proposal. Instead, as Cllr Watson put it, as the people of Theddlethorpe, Mablethorpe and Withern felt ‘threatened’ by the proposal, this was about calling on the Council to support ‘a community who need our representation, who need us to act on their behalf, and who need us to do our best for them.’
Councillor Hesketh referenced the motions recently carried by the Carlton, Holton le Clay, Mablethorpe and Sutton, Theddlethorpe, and Withern Parish / Town Councils. These all called either for an immediate poll or for the Council to withdraw from the process. This was preceded in May 2023 by the clear expression of public opinion when a slate of Councillors who are opposed to the nuclear waste dump were elected to local Councils and the District Council. This included all of the District Councillors representing the Theddlethorpe, Mablethorpe and Sutton on Sea Wards. Cllr Hesketh also referenced the recent poll of over 1,000 residents which found that 85% remain opposed to the GDF.
Even the Conservative Member of Parliament for Louth and Horncastle, Victoria Atkins, had called for a ballot within twelve months in a pre-election video statement and a letter to constituents. This led to the NFLAs writing to Ms Atkins asking her to call on the Conservative Leaders of East Lindsey and Lincolnshire County Councils to do so. To date, no reply has been received from the MP’s office.
In his response to the motion, the Council Leader Councillor Craig Leyland proposed what appeared to be a hastily cooked up amendment. Backed by Councillor Marsh, he proposed that a poll only be held only ‘once the Potential Host Community has been established and subject to any amendments made by national infrastructure policy’. We are assuming that this references recent pronouncements by Labour Ministers to making legislative changes to ‘fast track’ planning, particularly in the energy sector.
Cllr Leyland said in effect that he wished for the Council to give Nuclear Waste Services a further twelve months to carry out further intensive consultation and information sharing with residents, and referenced specifically that safety remained a major concern. If after this period he remained dissatified with progress, Cllr Leyland said he would be prepared to take a recommendation to the Council’s Executive Board to withdraw from the process, subject to prior scrutiny by the Council’s all-party Overview and Scrutiny Board. However, the Council Leader said nothing about what pressure he would apply to the Community Partnership and NWS to define the Potential Host Community or make preparations for a ballot within this period.
Regrettably the amendment was approved, with 27 votes for and 11 votes against, and the motion as amended was then approved with 32 votes for, 5 against and with 2 abstentions.
Councillor Robert Watson commented:
“After this meeting, the rationale behind the two Tory local authorities engaged with the process lies naked and exposed. Clearly, they have become addicted to their government’s levelling-up funding which has provided several massive projects for the deprived coastal strip, and they see the proposed nuclear waste dump as a route to receive more funds for new sea defences, railway, school etc. The disclosure by Cllr. Leyland that Cllr. Hill, the leader at Lincolnshire County Council had shown him a wish list was most illuminating.
“Although I stressed that our motion was not about the merits of a dump but about democracy, several Tory councillors proceeded to speak about the benefits that would come to the area with the acceptance of a nuclear waste dump, and I fear that the wishes of the residents will be brushed aside for this.”
Councillor Hesketh added:
“Councillors Leyland and Hill are completely out of step with my community. The community partnership has failed, it is as responsive as a corpse.”
“Now Councillor Leyland wants another 12 months to make up his mind on whether nuclear waste buried under our coastline is a good idea. He grows so much long grass he should keep ponies.
“NWS have demonstrated breathtaking incompetence. From a map calling Skegness Skeggross to dodgy reports. They cannot be trusted and the only thing that should be buried under the coastline is this failed project. “
In the meeting, Councillors also expressed concerns that if there were further delays in holding a poll, the government might choose to forego the ‘consent-based approach’, and instead impose a dump on an unwilling community. However this would run contrary to the recent response published by the Department of Energy Security and Net Zero to a consultation concluded last year on Managing Radioactive Waste. This restated a continued commitment to consent.
Under this guidance, there are two scenarios in which a poll of public opinion can be held.
A Relevant Principal Local Authority can exercise its Right to Withdraw from the process. This is what happened in South Holderness when the East Riding of Yorkshire Council passed a resolution to withdraw, killing the siting process. The guidance provides for, and actively encourages, a Council to hold a poll to determine whether the public wishes to withdraw from the process before making a final decision.
The guidance also provides for a Test of Public Support to be held, on the assumption that this would be held at the end of the siting process and once a Potential Host Community has been defined. However, once a Community Partnership is established, the test can actually be held at any time as it is within the gift of the Relevant Principal Local Authority to choose the date. What form the test will take and determining the boundary of the Potential Host Community which will be subject to the test are though responsibilities of the Community Partnership, in collaboration with NWS. There is therefore no guarantee, or presumption, that the test will take the form of a referendum.
Only one Test of Public Support can be held and the result is binding. If a referendum were held and the majority of electors in the Potential Host Community who cast a ballot vote ‘no’, the siting process ends. However, if they vote ‘yes’, subject to there being suitable geology, the area goes forward for development with a Geological Disposal Facility. Once the test is held, the Council’s Right to Withdraw expires.
In Theddlethorpe, the political landscape produces a further complication. In West Cumbria, there is one Relevant Principal Local Authority, Cumberland Council. However in East Lincolnshire, there are two, East Lindsey District Council and Lincolnshire County Council. This means that both Councils must act in concert to bring effect to a call for a Test of Public Support.
East Lindsey District Council could choose uniterally to exercise its Right to Withdraw and leave the Community Partnership. However this will not kill off the siting process as the guidance only requires the continued engagement of one Relevant Principal Local Authority, and, if this action is not recipcrocated by Lincolnshire County Council, the latter would remain invested. Lincolnshire County Council would then go on to determine the date of the Test of Public Support in its own right. Withdrawal by East Lindsey would however signify clear dissatisfaction and displeasure with the process.
Both the Conservative Leaders of East Lindsey and Lincolnshire have previously given a clear indication of their commitment to hold a ballot in 2027, so the qualified concession by Councillor Leyland to a ballot or withdrawal next year is an interesting development.
The NFLA Secretary has since written to the new Chair of the Theddlethorpe GDF Community Partnership asking him to ensure that the actions that result from the resolution of the District Council are taken up as ‘urgent workstreams’..as..’ time is fast moving on’.
Ends… //For more information please contact the NFLA Secretary Richard Outram by email to richard.outram@manchester.gov.uk
Note for Editors
Original motion:
‘With reference to the proposed nuclear waste site at Theddlethorpe, we request that the executive of this council responds to both proven, overwhelming democratic public opinion, and motions passed recently by the district’s town and parish councils and declares support for both our residents and visitors to this district by calling for an immediate test of public support to take place within 12 months or withdrawal of this council from the geological disposal facility process.
Proposer: Cllr Watson, Seconder: Cllr Hesketh
Motion as amended:
‘With reference to the proposed nuclear waste site at Theddlethorpe, we request that the executive of this council responds to both proven, overwhelming democratic public opinion, and motions passed recently by the district’s town and parish councils and declares support for both our residents and visitors to this district by calling for an immediate test of public support once the Potential Host Community has been established and subject to any amendments made by national infrastructure policy this to take place within 12 months or withdrawal of this council from the geological disposal facility process.
Proposer: Cllr Leyland, Seconder: Cllr Marsh
The letter sent by the NFLA Secretary to The Rt Hon Victoria Atkins MP on 7 July, a reply is awaited:
The Rt Hon Victoria Atkins, MP
By email to victoria@victoriaatkins.org.uk
Dear Ms. Atkins,
Congratulations on your re-election as Member of Parliament for Louth and Horncastle.
I am writing to you as Secretary of the UK/Ireland Nuclear Free Local Authorities with reference to your eve-of-poll letter to constituents outlining your position on the prospect of a nuclear waste dump being located at Theddlethorpe, and to ask you to take a prompt action relating to the promises you make within it.
In your letter, you state that you ‘have always argued for a swift conclusion to this and will support local residents in their quest for a prompt referendum’. It is commendable that you recognise that ‘a proper referendum’ ‘of people affected by the plans’ should be held. That is indeed the position of the NFLAs. We are also opposed to sampling or some other contrivance that falls short of providing for a proper ballot of all electors in the immediate area of impact.
For the record, and please forgive me if this is something with which you are already familiar, the procedures under which Nuclear Waste Services are working to identify a ‘suitable’ site for the nuclear waste dump (officially a Geological Disposal Facility) provide for circumstances in which the investigations for said dump in a specific area will be ended
– these being:
1. If the Relevant Principal Local Authorities do not support the proposal and exercise their Right to Withdraw (as happened at South Holderness as your colleague Graham Stuart knows).
2. If Nuclear Waste Services unilaterally withdraws from the process (as happened at Allerdale).
3. If a Test of Public Support takes place in which most electors voting say no to the dump.
The Relevant Principal Local Authorities in this instance are East Lindsey District Council and Lincolnshire County Council which must act in tandem to bring effect to their actions in:
1. Collectively exercising their Right to Withdraw, which immediately ends the process, or
2. Calling for a Test of Public Support, whereupon the Community Partnership is asked upon to determine the nature of the test. One flaw in the guidance is that there is no guarantee that the test will be a referendum.
However, legislation also provides for these local authorities to be able to conduct a local referendum of their own making to test public opinion prior to deciding whether to exercise their Right to Withdraw.
The Leaders of East Lindsey District Council and Lincolnshire County Council have previously agreed to hold a referendum in 2027.
On 17 July, a motion tabled by Sutton on Sea Councillor Robert Watson and Theddlethorpe Councillor Travis Hesketh will be considered at a meeting of East Lindsey District Council:
‘With reference to the proposed nuclear waste site at Theddlethorpe, we request that the executive of this council responds to both proven, overwhelming democratic public opinion, and motions passed recently by the district’s town and parish councils and declares support for both our residents and visitors to this district by calling for an immediate test of public support to take place within 12 months or withdrawal of this council from the geological disposal facility process. Proposer: Robert Watson Seconder: Travis Hesketh’
This references resolutions already passed by Theddlethorpe and Carlton Parish Councils and Mablethorpe Town Council objecting to the dump and calling for an immediate vote on the issue. It is my understanding that Withern Parish Council will soon be doing the same. Furthermore, a recent poll of over 1,000 residents conducted by Councillor Hesketh with the help of a team of local volunteers identified that 85% of respondents were opposed to the nuclear waste dump; this exactly mirrored the findings of a poll conducted by Theddlethorpe Parish Council of its electors held two years previously. And in the 2023 local elections most candidates returned to office representing wards within the Theddlethorpe GDF Search Area at District, Town, and Parish level were opposed to the nuclear waste dump, including all the District Councillors. Clearly then local people do not want the dump and they are anxious to see an end to the threat of it as soon as possible.
I would therefore ask you to use your influence as the local MP to speak with your Conservative colleagues, the Leaders of East Lindsey District Council and Lincolnshire County Council, to urge the Leader of East Lindsey District Council to throw his support, and that of his Conservative Group, behind this motion and for the Leader of Lincolnshire County Council to indicate his support for its aspirations, either to hold a poll by 2025 or withdraw from the process.
I would suggest that the date of the 2025 Lincolnshire County Council elections might provide an opportune and cost-effective backdrop for conducting a ‘proper referendum’ of those of your constituents who are ‘affected by the plans’.
The people of Mablethorpe, Sutton-on-Sea, and Theddlethorpe, have already lived for three years with this nightmare.
They have had enough of consultation.
They have had enough ‘information’.
They are ready for a referendum now.
Thank you for considering my letter and in anticipation of your action. Please in the first instance direct any response to me by email to richard.outram@manchester.gov.uk
Yours Sincerely, Richard Outram, Secretary, NFLAs
The letter sent to the Chair of the Theddlethorpe GDF Community Partnership on 21 July:
Mr David Fannin,
Chair, Theddlethorpe GDF Community Partnership
21 July 2024
Dear Mr Fannin,
Congratulations to you on your appointment as the new Chair of the Theddlethorpe GDF Community Partnership.
You will doubtless be aware that a motion was brought to last Wednesday’s meeting of the East Lindsey District Council by local Councillors Robert Watson and Travis Hesketh. This called for a Test of Public Support to be conducted within twelve months or alternately for East Lindsey District Council to exercise its Right to Withdraw from the GDF process.
An amendment to this motion was proposed by the Leader of the Council, Councillor Craig Leyland that qualified the timing of the test to the establishment of the Potential Host Community (PHC). The motion as amended was carried.
The wording of the motion as amended is shown below:
‘With reference to the proposed nuclear waste site at Theddlethorpe, we request that the executive of this council responds to both proven, overwhelming democratic public opinion, and motions passed recently by the district’s town and parish councils and declares support for both our residents and visitors to this district by calling for an immediate test of public support once the Potential Host Community has been established and subject to any amendments made by national infrastructure policy this to take place within 12 months or withdrawal of this council from the geological disposal facility process’.
For a Test of Public Support to be held in 2025 would also require the consent of Lincolnshire County Council as both are considered Relevant Principal Local Authorities with equal rights under the guidance driving the GDF process. I am sure that following Wednesday’s meeting Councillor Leyland will have appraised his colleague, Councillor Hill, Leader of Lincolnshire County Council, of the changed situation as both have previously made a commitment to hold a Test of Public Support in 2027.
Whether such a Test is held in 2025 or 2027, time is fast moving on and a PHC has yet to be determined. Yet this should be relatively straightforward.
From day one, NWS’s focus has been on the possibility of locating the surface receiving facility of the GDF at the former Conoco Gas Terminal in Theddlethorpe, with a caveat that ancillary facilities (offices etc) might be sited in Mablethorpe, so the PHC will clearly be focused on these locations.
The government guidance document ‘IMPLEMENTING GEOLOGICAL DISPOSAL – WORKING WITH COMMUNITIES’ helpfully provides advice on identifying a PHC on pages 57 and 58:
‘The Potential Host Community is the community within a geographical area that could potentially host a GDF. It will be identified over time from within the Search Area. The boundaries of the Potential Host Community need to be defined to determine who will get a say in the Test of Public Support.
6.84. The Potential Host Community will be defined using district, or unitary council electoral ward boundaries, depending on the administrative arrangements in place in the area.
The Potential Host Community would include all of the wards in which the following would be located:
• proposed surface and underground elements of a GDF;
• any associated development (as defined under the Planning Act 2008 in England) and any land required to mitigate impacts;
• transport links/routes from the GDF site to the nearest port, railhead or primary road network (i.e. out to where minor roads meet the nearest A roads);
• direct physical impacts associated with underground investigations, construction and operation of the GDF (identified though environmental impact assessment work carried out to support RWM’s engagement with communities and its development consent applications).
6.85. The Potential Host Community will likely be made up of several wards. Furthermore, all the wards could be contained within one district, county, or unitary authority or could cross local authority boundaries. The geographical boundaries of the Potential Host Community will be agreed by the Community Partnership based on information gathered through the siting process and the criteria above. The boundary of the Potential Host Community will reflect any future changes to electoral ward boundaries that may occur.
6.86. The Government’s view is that only residents in the area that will be directly impacted by the development should have a final say in whether they wish to host a GDF. It will be the people living in the Potential Host Community, through a Test of Public Support, that will decide whether they want to continue with the process for siting a GDF in the area.’
Conveniently, the surface receiving facility lies within the electoral ward of Withern and Theddlethorpe, whilst the ancillary facilities fall within that of Mablethorpe. The route from the GDF site to the nearest A-road (the A1031) already wholly lies within the Withern and Theddlethorpe Ward. Consequently, the PHC would appear to be these two electoral wards; this would satisfy the core criteria in 6.84, 6.85, and 6.86 as highlighted above.
The aspiration of local Councillors, and ourselves, and the expressed preference of the MP for Louth and Horncastle The Rt Hon Victoria Atkins MP, is that the Test of Public Support be held in the form of a public referendum.
I recognize that it is within the purview of the Community Partnership to determine both the PHC and the Test of Public Support, and to prepare for the test, so I am writing to urge you to take up these activities as urgent workstreams in your new role as Chair. Good luck.
Yours sincerely,
Richard Outram,
Secretary,
UK/Ireland Nuclear Free Local Authorities
