PRO NUKE RAH RAH

US firm to open Yorkshire nuclear reactor factory

Holtec
Holtec Britain plans to manufacture Small Modular Reactors, like the one pictured above, at the new site


South Yorkshire has been chosen as the home for an American company's factory making nuclear reactors.

Holtec, the world's largest exporter of capital nuclear components, said it planned to build small modular reactors (SMRs) at the factory to serve the UK, European and Middle East markets.

It would represent a £1.5bn investment in the area, creating about 3,000 engineering jobs over the next 20 years, South Yorkshire Mayoral Combined Authority said.

Oliver Coppard, South Yorkshire's mayor, said: "We're right at the cutting edge of the new nuclear, hydrogen and sustainable aviation sectors, and proud to be home to the largest clean tech sector in the UK."

“Holtec has chosen South Yorkshire as the home of its £1.5bn manufacturing facility because it recognises we are the new home of the emerging clean energy sector in this country," Mr Coppard said.

“I promised to deliver a clean energy transformation and this decision is just more evidence of the huge and increasingly rapid progress we’re making.”

The South Yorkshire site was chosen from 13 potential locations around the UK – with the mayor’s office stating it would “cement South Yorkshire as the natural home for emerging clean energy sectors”.

'High quality jobs'

Holtec Britain – a subsidiary of Holtec International - has been working at Sizewell B nuclear power station in Suffolk for more than 15 years and has been in the UK for nearly 30 years.

The firm said the SMR factory in South Yorkshire would see at least 70% of materials, components and work carried out in the UK.

It added that £50m would be invested into UK skills and training through its SMR Learning Academy.

Gareth Thomas, director of Holtec Britain, said he was impressed by the "history and pride" of the people the company met during a recent visit to South Yorkshire.

“Holtec has been part of the nuclear ecosystem in this country for many years and is absolutely committed to creating high quality local jobs, supply chain opportunities and partnerships that will help South Yorkshire and the UK grow and prosper," Mr Thomas said.

“Holtec’s SMR-300 is a PWR reactor enabling the factory to also produce large naval reactor components to not only support the country’s energy security, but also its national security."

Holtec currently employs more than 2,000 people globally and provides spent fuel storage and transport for 145 nuclear plants worldwide.

Rolls-Royce SMR also chose South Yorkshire as the home for its multimillion-pound facility earlier this year.

Here’s how we turbocharge new nuclear

With a new government committed to clean power, nuclear is essential. But to realise its promise, Britain needs to commit to the biggest new-build programme for generations.

By Tom Greatrex
NEW STATESMAN

TODAY

Image: Nuclear Industry Association

Labour has swept to power, taking almost all of the “nuclear seats” in Scotland and England in the process. All eyes are now on how Keir Starmer and his cabinet keep to their promise of ramping up nuclear alongside other clean energy technologies.

In Labour we have a party that is pro- nuclear. Its leadership, MPs and affiliated trade unions recognise that nuclear options provide essential clean, reliable, always-on power, and create good, long-term jobs in places that really need them.

The new Energy Secretary, Ed Miliband, underlined to us his commitment to working with the sector in achieving the objectives set out by his party. He is clear that nuclear will play a key part in both the 2030 clean power objective and, more crucially, in the real decarbonisation we need to see for the years beyond that as we head towards net zero by 2050.

Labour’s nuclear promise is clearly stated in its manifesto: “We will ensure the long-term security of the sector, extending the lifetime of existing plants, and we will get Hinkley Point C over the line. New nuclear power stations, such as Sizewell C, and small modular reactors (SMRs), will play an important role in helping the UK achieve energy security and clean power while securing thousands of good, skilled jobs.

“Ultimately, the long-term security of the sector rests on projects being actually delivered and not just spoken about. That means spades in the ground and power on the bars. Projects like Sizewell C, which needs to reach a final investment decision, plus a full fleet of SMRs, and a new large-scale station at Wylfa on Anglesey. Only new projects, properly financed and committed to, can give the supply chain the confidence that ours is a sector that can seriously help deliver the government’s goals.
But why nuclear and why now?

The UK still has the same weak, gas-dependent energy system that led us into the energy crisis three years ago. The government spent £56bn just to get us through one winter (2022-23). Already, people are looking nervously at the gas market and projecting bill increases in the autumn. If we do not make long-term investments, we will continue to pay enormous short-term costs from recurrent crises beyond our control, but which we know are coming.

Then there is growth, and we know that nuclear projects indisputably generate growth. The latest economic impact assessment of our industry found that the gross value added per full-time equivalent nuclear worker was more than £100,000. The sector contributes £4.5bn to the Exchequer, and the overall multiplier of economic activity is 2.6, so for every £1 spent in the industry, an additional £1.60 of economic activity is created.

With Hinkley Point C pumping £5.3bn of investment into the south-west, that means close to £8.5bn in extra growth has likely been created. Think how that can be multiplied all over the country by Sizewell C, Wylfa and SMRs. A new large-scale station at Wylfa, for example, would represent the single biggest investment in Welsh history, significantly more than any other project has brought to Wales.

Then you have the jobs. Hinkley Point C has created 23,000 jobs to date, with more than 1,300 apprentices trained and 8,000 people having received training from its welding, electrical and mechanical Centres of Excellence. Trainees come from all over the UK, including south Wales, the north- west and north-east of England. They do so because they know the opportunity is there for them to develop new skills taking part in one of the most important net zero projects in the country. When it is up and running, up to 1,000 full-time jobs would be sustained in operating the site for 60-80 years, maybe even longer. These are well-paid, skilled jobs in areas that need them the most. The opportunity is enormous, with the promise of huge investment, tens of thousands of new jobs and a revitalised supply chain, but we need to be bold. It starts with making the UK the best place to develop and deploy new reactors. To that end, we look forward to seeing how Great British Nuclear fits into Great British Energy. We have high hopes, buoyed by the Prime Minister’s promise to “speed up” the delivery of new nuclear, which he made at the launch of GB Energy.

Much has been said about Labour’s push for clean power by the end of this decade; an admirable and ambitious goal. But we will need clean power way beyond 2030 and 2050. The race doesn’t finish at net zero. It must be met and then sustained forever. Key to that endeavour is planning ahead and starting to build these long-term, clean-energy assets now and continuing that momentum. That is how we can create a prosperous future for Britain that is good for business, good for people and good for the planet.

UK

SHAMEFUL

Exclusive:

'Smoking gun' proves nuclear veterans' medical records were covered up by MoD

The Mirror has uncovered a secret order for MoD staff to remove medical records of troops used in Cold War radiation experiments, as campaigners call for an investigation into possible crimes

Evidence points to a cover-up at the highest levels of government, and there are calls for a public inquiry

By Susie Boniface

Reporter

19 Sep 2024

Orders to hide the medical records of British troops involved in Cold War radiation experiments came from the office of a junior defence minister, the Mirror can reveal.

A shocking new document reveals a “special directive” to dispose of health data from servicemen who took part in nuclear weapon trials in Australia and the Pacific.

Their health was monitored with radiation dose badges, blood tests, urine analysis and chest x-rays. But only the dose badges were ever made public. They were defective. Most showed nil radiation and were used to refuse war pensions. Earlier this year the Mirror reported some badges were falsified in the 1960s despite recording doses capable of causing cancer.

During the trials the Atomic Weapons Establishment collected biological data and kept a “special health register” on troops which has never been found. Afterwards it archived documents relating to the tests on a secret database, locking thousands away from view under legal exemptions relating to national security. That decision was reviewed and confirmed in 2014 and has been subject to a “rolling review” ever since.

In 2018, Parliament was told the MoD held “no information” about blood testing of troops. But in 2022 the Mirror uncovered a 1958 memo discussing the “gross irregularity” of blood tests on Sqn Ldr Terry Gledhill , who flew through the mushroom clouds.

Sqn Ldr Terry Gledhill was 'sniff boss', and was first into the mushroom clouds before ordering his men to follow 

(Image: Jane O'Connor)

Gledhill believed assurances from his superiors that the missions were safe - but later suffered decades of mystery illness

(Image: BNPS)


Keir Starmer urged to deliver on promise of justice for victims of British nuclear tests

As a result, Parliament was forced to declassify and publish 4,000 pages hidden at the AWE. They showed orders were given, and followed, for thousands of troops to be sampled over more than a decade. They were supposed to be duplicated for servicemen’s medical records and presented no risk to national security whatsoever.

Freedom of Information requests show that AWE officials accessed the database 283 times after we revealed the Nuked Blood Scandal – an average of once every three days. Through it all, Tory ministers told the public it contained no useful medical information.

When the files were published in May, the Tory minister who reviewed them told Parliament they did “not contain any medical records for any former service personnel”. Yet the Mirror found blood and urine test results, discussions about the health of veterans, and completed medical forms, in the files. The AWE has been unable to say if they were ever provided to the troops involved.

Today, veterans report huge gaps in their medical records while next of kin are routinely denied access. Their families have a legacy of cancers, miscarriages and birth defects in their children and grandchildren.

Campaigners are calling on the Prime Minister, who met them and backed their campaign in 2021, to order an inquiry

PM told to deliver justice for nuke vets

MPs tell veterans they were in cover-up

A MoD source confirmed to the Mirror that lawyers acting for the government during court battles with veterans were not aware of the Terry Gledhill memo, which referenced the orders for the blood testing programme. Had they known, they would have been duty-bound to share it with a judge.

In 1995 veterans told the European Court of Human Rights their medical records were hidden behind claims of national security. Government lawyers denied it and Strasbourg ruled the claim “speculative”. The AWE has now confirmed the only evidence it gave to the ECHR about blood tests included a letter claiming it was not necessary.

The Care Act 2014 makes it illegal to withhold, falsify or destroy medical records. It would be unlawful for someone to misapply a national security exemption of the Public Records Act to hide information that would otherwise be published.

Anyone who performs a public function unlawfully while knowing or expecting it to cause harm, risks prosecution for misconduct in public office. It carries a maximum life sentence. Failing to disclose material evidence to a court can also mean legal action can be restarted - with any payouts multiplied as a result.

Blood tests would be definitive proof of radiation injury, guaranteeing compensation to those affected. They would also be vital to plans for Britain surviving a nuclear attack or accident.

A MoD spokesman praised the veterans for contributing to national security. He added: “Ministers are looking hard at the issue, including the question of records. They will continue to engage with individuals and families. As part of this, the Minister for Veterans, Alistair Carns, has already met with Parliamentarians and a nuclear test campaign group to discuss their plans further.”

Timeline of a scandal

1952 First orders for blood tests

1959 ‘Special directive’ to remove medical records

1960s Radiation doses falsified

1985 Death data from first medical study suppressed

1995 MoD denies national security used to hide records

2013 Supreme Court rules against veterans without seeing blood tests

2014 High Court rules out war pensions without evidence of blood tests

2018 MoD claims to hold “no information” about blood tests

2022 Terry Gledhill tests uncov-ered. PM agrees it may be a crime

2023 Veterans report medical records missing. AWE says it has “no evidence” of blood testing

2024 AWE publishes 4,000 pages of evidence. MoD admits government lawyers unaware.

UK

Painting of naked woman sparks police gallery visit

IT'S 2024 NOT 1984

Nicola Goodwin
BBC Midlands Investigations team

BBC
Poppy Baynham said the controversy was improving her profile as an artist

A gallery owner has said she will reject calls by police to remove a painting of a naked woman from the window.

Val Harris said officers visited The Chair gallery in Hay-on-Wye on Thursday and warned that its presence could be a public order offence and she could ultimately end up in court.

The BBC understands they were acting on complaints from two members of the public.

Dyfed-Powys Police confirmed officers attended the gallery but said it was too early to say if action would be taken.

The painting, by artist Poppy Baynam was part of a wider exhibition of work by her and her sister.

It features a naked woman wearing cowboy boots with her legs spread, revealing a black triangle with pink wool on top, rather than genitals.

However, that has not stopped a number of complaints, with some people branding it "pornography".

The painting sits in the window of The Chair gallery, with a notice inviting people to leave their comments in a book


Ms Harris said she chose the painting for the window, partly because of its proportions.

Soon after it went on display on Monday, she said she was called back to the gallery after reports of abuse from some members of public.

On Thursday she said police told her to remove it from the window and place it further inside the gallery.

Some of the most famous artworks in the world feature naked women or men, and Ms Baynham said better-known artists were allowed to display similar works without the same backlash.

"I just came to Hay thinking it would be a peaceful week but, no, we've stirred Hay up for sure!" she said.

"It just shows how closed-minded people are, and let's say if I was a famous artist I don't think anyone would say anything."

Hay-on-Wye, on the Powys-Herefordshire border, is best known for its bookshops and literary festival that attracts some of the biggest names in the cultural arena.

In a statement, Hay Town Council said it had not received any complaints about the painting and that no action was being planned or discussed.

Ms Harris said a sign next to the painting urged passers-by to come in and share their views in a visitor book.


Val Harris said she would stand by the young artist

She said the response had so far been "50:50", with as many people supportive of the painting's position as those angered by it.

Speaking to the BBC outside, while some people described it as inappropriate or "lewd", many others, including those with young children, were relaxed about its presence.

Jessie Dixon from Hay said she did not see it as being offensive, adding: "I thought of it as exciting and playful and I never thought of it as sexual object or anything like that."

She also said she was upset that people had gone to the police with their concerns.

Another woman, Dawn Lewis, said: "It's not my cup of tea but I can't see it being offensive personally, it's art."


'Not very Hay'


Ms Baynham, has welcomed the wider response.

"That's all an artist ever dreams of... their name getting out there and being heard and their work being seen," she said.

She studies at an art college in London and said the collection, and the comments it had generated, would form the basis of her final year dissertation.

But she said that while her mother had been supportive, she had warned her "it's not very Hay-on-Wye".

The painting itself is still for sale and Ms Baynham said she would listen to offers.

UK

Private cabbies 'losing business' to bus service


Westlink covers for axed bus routes

Private taxi drivers at a railway station claim they are being undercut by a cheap bus service.

Westlink is a subsidised service set up by the West of England Combined Authority (WECA) to cover for axed bus routes.

It normally runs a shuttlebus service at Parkway in Bristol, but in the last couple of weeks has been using cars to run the service instead.

Taxi drivers say it means people are walking past the taxi rank, and taking the Westlink car for £2 per ticket price.


Vaughan Hinsley, private cab driver, told BBC Radio Bristol he is losing business.

"It's very galling that they're parking in the car park," he said.

"We've got ex-customers walking past our taxis where we're providing a service - You've got to bear in mind this is taxpayers' money.

"It must cost at least £20 an hour to keep these vehicles on the road. It costs £2.40 just to sit in my taxi."

'A temporary measure'


WECA said the taxis were a temporary measure while WestLink got a new fleet of smaller minibuses approved.

A WECA spokesperson said: "Because of a short delay in getting the new vehicles approved by South Gloucestershire Council and from the Traffic Commission’s Office for them to use bus stops, there were a number of temporary taxi saloons that couldn’t use the bus stops.

"This may have led some taxi drivers to believe that they were operating like taxis, but going forward it will operate in the same way that Westlink has since last year, just with smaller minibuses."

From Brazil to India to Europe, free public transport is gaining momentum

WAIT, WHAT?!

Nigel Farage faces questions over claim he was warned against meeting constituents

There is no record of this advice having been given to the MP by either the Speaker's Office or Parliament's security team and neither have any recollection of such a conversation

Nigel Farage made the claim on LBC Radio 

By  Mikey Smith

Deputy Political Editor

THE MIRROR

 19 Sep 2024

Nigel Farage faces questions over his claim that he was warned not to hold constituency surgeries for his own safety. Sources said the Reform UK leader was not told to shun in-person meetings in his Clacton seat - as he claimed - because this would interfere with his democratic duties.

Asked whether he'd be holding physical surgeries in his Clacton seat, the Reform UK leader told LBC Radio: "not yet", but that he would "when Parliament allows me". On whether he had been advised for his own security not to hold surgeries, he replied: "I would have thought that would make sense, wouldn't you?"

He said the guidance had been given by "the Speaker's (Sir Lindsay Hoyle's) Office, and beneath the Speaker's Office there is a security team who give advice and say you should do some things and not do others.

"So we're not in a fit state to do the old-style surgeries, but do you know what, if you've got something to say to me as a Clacton resident, Zoom is not the end of the world," Mr Farage add

There is no record of this advice having been given to the MP by either the Speaker's Office or Parliament's security team and neither have any recollection of such a conversation, the PA news agency understands.

Mr Farage had suggested that he was at risk of being killed when pressed on his activity in his constituency.

"Do I have an office in Clacton? Yes. Am I allowing the public to flow through the door with their knives in their pockets? No, no I'm not," he said. Asked why would the people of Clacton want to flow through the door with knives in their pockets, he said: "Well they did in Southend. They murdered David Amess, and he was a far less controversial figure than me."

Conservative politician Sir David was fatally stabbed during a surgery in his Southend constituency in 2021 by an Islamic State-supporting terrorist.

Commons Speaker Sir Lindsay said: 

"As a constituency MP in Chorley, I hold regular surgeries myself with constituents - and whenever a Member asks for my advice on this matter, I always say that if you are going to hold constituency surgeries, make sure you take advice from the Parliamentary Security Department - and do so safely." A House of Commons spokesperson said: "The ability for MPs to perform their Parliamentary duties safely, both on and off the estate, is fundamental to our democracy. The Parliamentary Security Department (PSD), working closely with the police, offer all MPs a range of security measures for those with offices or surgeries in their constituencies - helping to ensure a safe working environment. We do not comment on individual MPs' security arrangements or advice because we would not wish to compromise the safety of MPs, Parliamentary staff or members of the public, but these are kept under continuous review."

UK

Domestic abuse experts to be embedded in 999 control rooms

Almost 100 domestic abuse-related offences were recorded by the police every hour on average last year

Judith Burns
BBC News Home Affairs

West Midlands Police/PA
Raneem Oudeh (l) called 999 multiple times on the night she and her mother Khaola Saleem (r) were murdered by Raneem's ex-husband

Domestic abuse specialists will be embedded in 999 control rooms in England and Wales as part of the government's pledge to halve violence against women and girls in a decade.

The measure is part of "Raneem's Law" in memory of Raneem Oudeh, 22, and her mother Khaola Saleem who were murdered by Ms Oudeh's estranged husband in 2018.

The government also announced a new domestic abuse protection order pilot that will order more abusers to stay away from victims and impose tougher sanctions if they fail to do so.

Home Secretary Yvette Cooper said victims "need to know the police will be there for them" and if they come forward, any report "will be treated with the seriousness and urgency it deserves".

"Failure to understand the seriousness of domestic abuse costs lives and far too many have already been lost," Ms Cooper said.

The aim is for specialists with expertise in domestic abuse to be on hand in control rooms to ensure victims get a fast response from officers on the ground and are quickly referred to support services.

The scheme will be piloted in select police forces from early next year. Details on which forces are taking part in the pilot have not yet been announced.

Ms Cooper described the new measures as "vital" and "a personal priority for me".

She told the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg in January about her plans for the measures, which Labour also proposed in February.


Almost 100 domestic abuse-related offences were recorded by police every hour on average last year, the government said.

On the night Ms Oudeh and her mother were killed, she rang 999 multiple times, but officers failed to reach the two women in time.

In total, 13 reports were made to the police about concerns for her safety - but no arrests were made until it was too late.

An inquest found police errors "materially contributed" to their deaths. West Midlands Police has since apologised to the family.

Nour Norris, Ms Oudeh's aunt and Mrs Saleem's sister, said having domestic abuse specialists in control rooms would "save lives by making sure no warning signs are ignored, unlike in Raneem's story".

"Their suffering and the way the system failed them is something I will never forget," Ms Norris said. "What started as a quest for justice for my family became a mission to improve outcomes for all domestic abuse victims everywhere."

Ms Oudeh's estranged husband, Janbaz Tarin, was jailed for a minimum of 32 years in December 2018, after admitting to the murders.

In another effort to protect women and girls, the government also announced a new domestic abuse protection order pilot that will start in November.

Police already have the power to legally order abusers not to contact or go within a certain distance of victims for up to 28 days.

The pilot will introduce no maximum time limit for orders, impose electronic tagging of offenders and require perpetrators to notify police of any change in name or address.

The new orders will cover all forms of domestic abuse, including violence, stalking and controlling behaviour.

Breaching an order will be a criminal offence punishable by up to five years in prison.

Victims and other third parties such as charities will also be able to apply directly for an order, rather than having to rely on police and criminal courts.

The new domestic abuse protection orders will be piloted by officers in Greater Manchester Police, the Metropolitan Police (South London Borough Command Unit) and British Transport Police.

Refuge, the charity which supports survivors of domestic violence, welcomed the changes but called for "far more detail on how these plans will be implemented and how staff will be safely recruited, vetted and most importantly trained".

Refuge's interim chief executive Abigail Ampofo warned that police rarely act on breaches of existing protection orders, making them often "worth little more than the paper they are written on".

"We need a real sea change in internal policing culture and the police forces' response to domestic abuse overall," said Ms Ampofo.

Domestic abuse victims must be heard on first 999 call, campaigner says

The aunt of Raneem Oudeh, who was killed by her ex-partner, says her niece was ‘not heard until she lost her life’.

Campaigner Nour Norris during a visit to Kent Police’s Coldharbour Police Complex in Aylesford, Kent (Gareth Fuller/PA)

PA Wire
Helen Corbett

Domestic violence victims need to be heard the first time they call 999, a campaigner whose niece was killed by her ex-partner after calling the police multiple times has said.

Nour Norris, whose niece Raneem Oudeh, 22, and sister Khaola Saleem, 49, were murdered by Ms Oudeh’s ex-partner in 2018, said that those calling the police for help “need to be given the opportunity to be saved”.

The Home Office has said some police forces will start embedding domestic abuse specialists in their 999 control rooms early next year as part of “Raneem’s Law” to transform the way the police handle cases of violence against women and girls.

The Government will fund the pilot in targeted police forces from early 2025, but did not say how many forces would be involved in the initial rollout.

An inquest found mistakes made by West Midlands Police had “materially contributed” to Ms Oudeh and Ms Saleem’s deaths.

On the night they were killed, Ms Oudeh had called West Midlands Police four times to register concerns for her safety, and the force had previously responded to 10 domestic abuse incidents linked to the case.

Five officers were disciplined over the failures.

Nour Norris, the sister and aunt of Khaola Saleem and Raneem Oudeh, who were killed by Ms Oudeh’s ex-partner (Gareth Fuller/PA)

Ms Norris said her sister and niece “tried their best to be here today” but “the system failed”.

She said: “No-one should really have to suffer what Raneem suffered.

“Trying to explain herself, trying to put an administration order in place for herself … trying to do whatever it takes to be heard, and she was still not heard until she lost her life.

“My sister lost her life because she was doing the job of the police – doing the sacrificing for mother and daughter.”

My sister lost her life because she was doing the job of the police - doing the sacrificing for mother and daughter.

Ms Norris joined Home Secretary Yvette Cooper and safeguarding minister Jess Phillips to meet 999 control handlers during a visit to Kent Police’s Coldharbour Police Complex in Aylesford, Kent, on Thursday.

Police showed them an emergency response video call – known as rapid video response – which officers are using as part of efforts to ensure that victims get a fast response and are referred to support services as quickly as possible.

In that example, police said the woman who called had said the alleged perpetrator was not home so it was deemed safe to respond with a video call rather than a home visit.

Raneem’s Law will be brought into effect through national guidance that police will be required to follow.

“The first instance when someone calls 999 – this is the first time where you really need to give them the right safeguarding. They need to be heard,” Ms Norris said.

“They need to be given the opportunity to be saved.

“And 999 call handlers, with specialists, they’ll be able to offer that.”

Home Secretary Yvette Cooper (front left), safeguarding minister Jess Phillips (back right) and counsellor and campaigner Nour Norris (back left) meet 999 control handlers during a visit to Kent Police’s Coldharbour Police Complex in Aylesford, Kent (Gareth Fuller/PA)

Ms Cooper said: “What we’ve seen is if there is proper domestic abuse expertise, it means that you can get the right response to the calls that come in and proper understanding of the seriousness of domestic abuse as a crime and how lives are at risk.

“In the most serious cases, as we saw in the awful case where Raneem and her mother Khaola lost their lives because the police didn’t respond to a 999 call.

“We cannot let that happen, and that’s why we want to make sure that we’ve got that expertise that we need in 999 control rooms across the country.”

It comes as the Metropolitan Police confirmed on Wednesday that four officers are under investigation for misconduct after two women were murdered by a man they had complained about to the force.

Carl Cooper, 66, was jailed for life in July for the murders of Naomi Hunte, 41, who was stabbed in the chest, and Fiona Holm, 48, whose body has never been found.

Both women had been in a relationship with handyman Cooper around a year apart and had complained to police about his violence.

A domestic abuse protection order pilot is to be launched in November that will place tougher sanctions on domestic abusers if they fail to stay away from their victims.

Perpetrators will be legally required to inform the police of any name or address changes under the new orders.

The orders will also allow electronic tagging to be imposed and assessments for behaviour change programmes to be ordered.

Whilst we broadly support the raft of measures announced by the Home Office, including specialists in 999 control rooms, we need to see far more detail on how these plans will be implemented and how staff will be safely recruited, vetted and most importantly trained for this pilot scheme due to be implemented in early 2025

Abigail Ampofo, Refuge

There will also be no maximum duration for these orders, unlike current powers police have to order abusers to not make contact with or go within a certain distance of their victim, which expire after 28 days.

Breaching one of these new orders will be a criminal offence, punishable by up to five years in prison.

They can be applied for all forms of domestic abuse, including violence, stalking and controlling behaviour.

Family and civil courts as well as local authorities, charities and social services will be able to apply the orders – rather than only police and criminal courts.

Abigail Ampofo, interim chief executive of Refuge, said: “Whilst we broadly support the raft of measures announced by the Home Office, including specialists in 999 control rooms, we need to see far more detail on how these plans will be implemented and how staff will be safely recruited, vetted and most importantly trained for this pilot scheme due to be implemented in early 2025.”

Ms Ampofo said Refuge had been waiting “with bated breath” for the rollout of domestic abuse protection orders first announced by the previous government and is pleased the pilot is getting up and running.

She added: “However, we know there are a myriad of issues when it comes to police using their powers to protect survivors and hold perpetrators to account, so often survivors tell us that the police don’t act on breaches of these orders, and they are often worth ‘little more than the paper they are written on’.”

Almost 100 domestic abuse-related offences were recorded by the police every hour on average last year, the Home Office said.

UK

Women's rights activist statue 'to inspire others'

Andy Giddings
BBC News, West Midlands

Kate Blakemore described Ada Nield Chew as a woman who "put her head above the parapet"

A statue of a 19th-Century women's rights campaigner could inspire more people to stand up for their rights, according to one of the people behind it.

Ada Nield Chew from Crewe fought for the fair treatment and pay of her female colleagues and also for their right to vote.

Last year a Statue for Ada campaign group was set up to raise £100,000 to erect a fitting memorial in her home town.

Trustee Kate Blakemore said: "We want the next generation of activists to come through, to use their voice to influence change."

Two possible locations have been considered and Ms Blakemore said: "When I first heard about her in 2017, I couldn't believe that there was hardly anything in Crewe."

She hopes an artist can get to work early next year, but a lot of fundraising still needs to be done and she has asked local businesses to support the campaign.

An exhibition dedicated to Ada Nield Chew has been created

The campaign received a boost earlier this week when it was mentioned in parliament by the MP for Crewe and Nantwich, Connor Naismith.

Ms Blakemore said it was about more than just a statue, though: she wanted people to talk about Ms Chew and her work.

An exhibition is currently on show at the town's heritage centre and she was visiting schools to tell children about the campaigner.

The aim is to get the statue completed by 2028.

Australian construction strikes take on union-busting Labor government

The Labor government boasts that its attack on the CFMEU is ‘the strongest action that any government has ever taken against any union’

Workers on the picket line with visiting NTEU members from Sydney University during the Australian construction strikes

 (Picture: RAFA via Solidarity)

By Ian Rintoul in Sydney
Thursday 19 September 2024

SOCIALIST WORKER Issue

Over 60,000 construction workers in Australia are striking this week over the Labor government’s disgraceful attack on their union.

It is the second strike in the month. Labor prime minister Anthony Albanese’s government used unsubstantiated smears in the media to impose state control of the CFMEU’s construction division, which organises building, forestry and maritime workers.

The union is now controlled by Labor’s workplace minister Murray Watt and his flunkey, administrator-in-chief Mark Irving.

The administrator has the power to remove elected officials and delegates and sack organisers employed by the union.


There are penalties of up to two years’ jail and almost $1 million fines for obstructing the administrator.

Irving’s first act was to sack elected officials in three states and remove 270 members who were democratically elected to union committees. He’s also sacked three organisers in Brisbane.

This is a shocking act of betrayal from Labor. The party made a particular point of acknowledging the union movement when it was elected two years ago, but has consistently moved to rightwards since.

Labor has shown its true colours by using Tory votes in parliament and siding with the construction industry bosses. It’s the most appalling act of union-busting since a Labor government deregistered the predecessor of the CFMEU, the Builders Labourers’ Federation, in 1986.

Watt boasted that Labor’s attack is “the strongest action that any government has ever taken against any union”.

In 1998, the then Australian Tory government’s attempt to smash the Maritime Union of Australia was defeated when the whole union movement stood behind it. This time, however, the ACTU union federation has junked any union principles and is slavishly supporting the Labor government.

Only three unions—the electricians’, plumbers’ and maritime workers’ unions—opposed the CFMEU being suspended from the ACTU.

The CFMEU has long been a thorn in the side of the construction bosses. It has a history of militancy and a willingness to defy anti-union laws that impose the most severe restrictions on the right to strike in a liberal democracy.

The CFMEU has racked up tens of millions of dollars in fines for taking unlawful industrial action. And, according to the government, the union has broken industrial laws 2,600 times in the past 20 years. That is the militancy that Labor and the bosses want to crush.

Construction bosses have been quick to take advantage as the administrator is able to sack organisers and remove delegates if they are involved in any unlawful action.

Some employers are refusing to sign a new workplace agreement that would have given construction workers 5 percent wage rises.

The CFMEU is mounting a High Court challenge to the Labor government’s legislation. But such a challenge will take months and will channel rank-and-file anger with Labor into a legal dead end.

The real power to beat the Labor government’s administrator—and the anti-union laws—are strikes. The action has brought construction workers and their supporters out in every major city.

The unions covering electricians and plumbers have put over $1 million into the High Court action—money that would be better used for a strike fund.

A strike, even by the three main unions supporting the CFMEU, would be enough to beat back the administration. The two days of strike action so far have been unlawful, but no action has been taken against any of the unions involved.

The Labor government’s attack on the CFMEU has sent shock waves through the labour movement. The plumbers’ union has disaffiliated from the ACTU and is calling for a union summit within the next three months to set up an alternative.

Many rank-and-file union members have voted Labor all their lives. But they are now confronted with the reality that Labor is more willing to openly collaborate with the bosses than represent the workers it relies on to win elections.

If the anger of workers in the construction and allied industries is mobilised, they can beat Labor’s union-busting administration.

More grassroots organising and strikes defying the law are needed to defend the CFMEU and end the enforced administration.

Ian Rintoul is a member of Solidarity, the Socialist Workers Party’s sister organisation in Australia

SCOTLAND

Labour MP urges UK government to nationalise Grangemouth refinery

David Wallace Lockhart
BBC Scotland News Political Correspondent

The closure of the Grangemouth refinery has been described as a "kick in the teeth" by workers


The Labour MP representing Grangemouth has called on the UK government to nationalise the site's oil refinery to maintain operations and save jobs.

Brian Leishman said it was a matter of public interest and national security.

Petroineos - a joint venture between Chinese state-owned PetroChina and London-based Ineos - confirmed last week that the 100-year-old refinery would close with the loss of about 400 jobs.

Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer said the UK government was working to ensure there are "safe, secure, skilled jobs" in Scotland for “generations to come”.

Petroineos intends to convert the refinery - the oldest in the UK - into a terminal able to import petrol, diesel, aviation fuel and kerosene, which it expects to open early next summer.

A spokesperson said previously that the move would "safeguard fuel supply for Scotland".



Alloa and Grangemouth MP Brian Leishman says the "fight must go on"


Leishman insisted that closure was “not a done deal” and that “the fight must go on”.

He told BBC Scotland News: “We’ve got to pull out all the stops and that includes nationalisation.”

The new MP said that it was “most definitely” time for the government to take over ownership.

Asked if Sir Keir Starmer was doing enough to save the future of Grangemouth, Leishman replied: “I would challenge that.”

He said both the UK and Scottish governments had “held the hand” of the refinery’s owner Petroineos, and had “meekly accepted the narrative that the refinery is unprofitable, which I would absolutely contest".

The Labour parliamentarian said that ensuring a key piece of the refinery’s equipment - the hydrocracker - was working would be “a game changer” for profitability.

He said that energy security was “intrinsically linked” to the UK’s national security, and therefore the government should step in to save operations.


Sir Keir Starmer says the UK government is committed to protecting skilled jobs in Scotland

First Minister John Swinney said he was "deeply disappointed" about the closure, while the Scottish and UK governments announced a joint £100m investment package to support a “just transition for the workforce and community”.

Sir Keir said he knew how “keenly” the closure would be felt in Scotland.

“We also need to make sure the transition to clean energy is real and delivers the secure jobs of the future,” he told BBC Scotland News.

He cited Labour’s commitment to setting up GB energy – a UK government-backed energy company to be headquartered in Scotland.

The location is yet to be announced but BBC Scotland News understands the firm, which will help fund new and existing clean technology, will be based in Aberdeen.

Scotland Secretary Ian Murray has insisted the UK government is "committed to working together looking at how we can help the area build on its skilled workforce and local expertise to boost economic growth".

'Kick in the teeth'


Workers described the announcement as a "kick in the teeth", while unions labelled it a "terrible indictment" of both governments and of the company.

About 2,000 people are directly employed at Grangemouth, including about 500 at the refinery, while others work at Ineos’s petrochemicals business and the Forties pipeline.

Announcing the refinery’s closure, Petroineos said it was unable to compete with sites in Asia, Africa and the Middle East.

The converted terminal is expected require fewer than 100 employees.

The BBC understands the refinery is currently losing about $500,000 (£383,000) a day and is on course to lose around $200m (£153m) in 2024.

The Grangemouth refinery is one of six in the UK and the only one in Scotland.

It was originally opened by BP in 1924 and expanded into petrochemicals in the 1950s. Ineos acquired the site in 2005.

It is the main supplier of aviation fuel for Scotland's airports and a major supplier of petrol and diesel ground fuels across the central belt.

According to Ineos, about half of the refinery’s crude oil comes from the North Sea, with most of it delivered via ship to Finnart Ocean Terminal on Loch Long and piped east across the country to Grangemouth.

Between 250 to 280 of the refinery redundancies are expected to happen in the three months after the plant closes, with 100 staff retained for between six to 12 months to help decommission and to build up the import business.

A further 30 workers are to be retained for longer to work on decommissioning and demolition, which is expected to continue until 2030.

Twenty jobs will also go at the Finnart pipeline terminal at Loch Long.

SCOTLAND

What Green industrial strategy?

20/09/2024
COMMON WEAL
Rory Hamilton

Last week, the Scottish Government published the first part of its Green Industrial Strategy for Scotland. The long and short is that there’s not much in it. This might be to be expected from a ‘foundational’ paper that “identifies areas of strength and opportunity for Scotland to grow globally competitive industries in the transition to net zero”. Before getting into the meat of the paper, I might make two observations: 1) for an ‘industrial’ strategy, unions are only mentioned once – for a piece of work which should have a direct impact on workers, workers who will be key to a just transition, you’d think consulting with them might have made sense; and 2) for a piece of work targeted at addressing Scotland’s response to the climate crisis, something we’ve known about for years, this is far too late in coming. Common Weal published its Green New Deal for Scotland, fully-costed in late 2019-early 2020, and only five years later are the Scottish government putting forward a strategy for tackling the same issues.

The strategy highlights five ‘opportunity areas’ for Scotland: 1) maximising Scotland’s wind economy; 2) developing a self-sustaining carbon, capture, utilisation and storage sector; 3) supporting green economy professional and financial services, with global reach; 4) growing our hydrogen sector; and 5) establishing Scotland as a competitive centre for the clean Energy Intensive Industries of the future. Let’s go through them one by one and see what lies beneath the rhetoric.

1. Maximising Scotland’s wind economy

It’s a bold move to open with a goal to maximise Scotland’s wind economy, when none of it is in the hands of the Scottish public. As Common Weal has extensively covered, not only was it wrong to sell off Scotland’s offshore wind capacity to the private sector in the first place (instead of placing this in the hands of a National Energy Company, whether through Municipal ownership or through a mutual company), but the capping of bids for licences severely limited the potential for ScotWind to ‘maximise’ the offshore wind potential in the same way as, say New York did. The Scottish Government should now consider buying equity stakes in the projects to return revenue to the Scottish public, and move from having no involvement in the development of Scotland’s natural resources to being a silent partner, with a longer term option to become the active or sole partner.

2. Developing a self-sustaining carbon, capture, utilisation and storage sector

CCUS is another scheme which we have debunked time and time again. Not only has it been proven to not work, but in some cases the emissions are more harmful. I wont go over all the arguments again, instead watch this short video or read Robin’s article from THREE years ago. What I will say is this, Carbon Capture and Storage is a con led by the oil and gas industry as a way to delay the transition to renewable energy and keep their profit base alive for a few years longer. They are pushing it hard – last year there were 30 meetings held between the Scottish Government and oil and gas executives which were initially kept hidden from the public record. The money invested in developing the CCUS sector as part of this strategy would be much more effective in supporting training schemes for current oil and gas workers which will help them move into renewables-based jobs.

3. Supporting green economy professional and financial services, with global reach

So the argument goes that financial and professional services (FPS) is one of Scotland’s core strengths, being the largest financial centre outside of London, employing around 144,00 people. But it should be no surprise to hear that the interests represented by this sector are not those of the broader public. Whether it is one of the big four accountancy firms, hedge funds and investment banking, fintech, or asset management companies, the goal is maximising financial returns on investments largely by speculating on values. In this case the speculating is focused on Scotland’s “natural capital” (for natural capital read, Scotland’s resources: wind, land, solar, tidal, etc.), meaning that supporting Scotland’s green FPS sector with global reach is code for attracting more foreign direct investment (again code for profit extraction), as we’/ve already seen successfully leveraged in the offshore wind industry and in the selling off of Scotland’s trees. Besides – who ever thought of accountants and bankers when ‘industry’ was mentioned, Sod’s Law for all the engineers, welders, timber workers, transporters, farmers, joiners, plumbers, electricians, and anyone else whose skills will be crucial to the just transition that I haven’t mentioned. When the closure of one of Scotland’s last remaining industrial sites at Grangemouth is estimated to see around 400 immediate job losses and impact a further 2,200, it is fairly on the nose that it might well be white collar workers (many of whom will already come from and live in fairly comfortable living and working conditions) who will see the greatest support from what should be an enormous engineering and investment programme like the Green New Deal.

4. Growing our hydrogen sector & 5. Establishing Scotland as a competitive centre for the clean Energy Intensive Industries of the future

Now there isn’t so much to comment on these final two ‘opportunity areas’, hence I am taking them together here. Common Weal supports the investment in hydrogen technologies, indeed the future of public and sustainable transports is not in electric cars, but moving to alternative fuels such as hydrogen. A word of warning though, is not to read all hydrogen as good hydrogen. Some hydrogens are can be derived from fossil fuels such as gas, and the use of carbon capture for example is one means of turning this into ‘clean energy’, it has been shown that blue hydrogen can be worse for the environment than the pure gas itself. So while we must support growing the hydrogen sector, emphasis should be placed on sourcing green hydrogen and not giving credence to hydrogen fuels which masquerade as clean energy but are actually just fossil fuels in disguise. And similarly the establishing to Scotland as a competitive centre for clean energy industries is surely the goal of this whole strategy which, objectively, and especially considering Scotland’s natural resources, is hardly disagreeable.

So in short, this so-called ‘industrial strategy’ is caked in the language of capital, and without casting too many aspersions, the fingerprints of the Scottish Government’s favourite accountancy firms-come public sector consultants are all over it. So much for the ‘active state’ Kate Forbes and Gillian Martin call for in their ministerial forward, the only state activity in this strategy is opening market doors for the private sector, and closing them again on the way out after all the profit is gone.

“But the public sector is only part of the economy” they say in the same forward. Is it? You wouldn’t know it was ANY part of the economy from reading this paper. They highlight Denmark and Ireland as examples to emulate, but the choices made by previous SNP governments (of which many members of this cabinet signed off on) have foreclosed the possibility of doing so, whether that’s not creating a National Energy Company (of any kind), and the Energy Development Agency (which we modelled off the Danish example) we proposed, or allowing the Scottish National Investment Bank to fall in tow to the interests of capital, and ignoring the potential of it to be that active state by leading investment into key sectors such as this.

It is quite apt that one of the governments which is failing the workers of Grangemouth, one of Scotland’s last sights of industrial activity, released this lacklustre paper on the same day it was announced that Grangemouth would indeed close next year. Indeed, with the resources we have Scotland should be a green industrial powerhouse leading the world in a radical response to the climate crisis, and lord knows the public needs the investment a Green New Deal would generate, but this paper belies the chokehold that the private sector has on policy making in Scotland.

What if we cared about the future?

20/09/2024
COMMON WEAL
Robin McAlpine

London is due many thanks to Joseph Bazalgette. As you may know, he was the man who designed London’s sewer system, and he did something which is unimaginable now – he future-proofed it. He worked out the size of the sewers London needed, concluded London would get bigger, concluded sewers shouldn’t be built in two goes and so simply doubled the size.

The outcome of this was the Swinging Sixties didn’t need you to wade through sewage to get down Carnaby Street. Had he not over-specified the sewers, they would have reached overflow point by the middle of the 20th century. Now? In Scotland we can’t successfully build a school big enough for the children already at it.

What I want to write about here is the mindset that says ‘I want to leave a positive legacy for the next generation’ and the mindset that says ‘to hell with it, the next generation can deal with it’. Which are we? Not the former. Joseph Bazalgette would never get anywhere near interview stage if Scotland put a contract for a new sewer system on its procurement portal today.

I was thinking about this because of a daft laddie conversation with someone who knows a lot more than me, and an email in response to a previous newsletter piece. Both were about the National Grid which is about to get a major upgrade to facilitate decarbonisation of electricity supply. Common Weal has been doing a lot of policy work on this (major paper to publish soon) and one of our readers is going to be stuck with the consequences.

Our reader is getting a new array of mega-pylons in her immediate area. These are enormous and it’s a stretch to find much beauty in them. But we need that copper up there because we need to get that wind energy into the grid. This is what prompts my questions.

I asked someone who used to run a national electricity grid why we didn’t just bury the cables. The answer is easy – it costs three times as much. OK, but about a third of the total cost of our electricity grid is maintenance on cables. Of course it is – they are comparatively thin wires strung way up high in a stormy country.

Ah but, said my expert, there would be plenty maintenance of underground cabling too. I asked why? The answer (as I understand it) is that thin cables like that are still vulnerable, as are all their junctions and connections. Aye, but why make them thin? You need to do that if you’re hanging them 50 metres in the air and weight is a big issue, but not if you bury them.

So make the cabling thicker and you’d have less maintenance, though of course this increases the cost further. But if you don’t need to squeeze your electricity down thin cables, do you need to use copper? Not really. Aluminium has 60 per cent of the conductivity of copper (so you lose a bit more energy along the cables) but it is a quarter of the price of copper and is much lighter to transport.

So the rule is that you’d struggle to run a grid from aluminium strung out between pylons, which is why we don’t do it. But you don’t have that restriction in the ground. Putting thick aluminium cabling underground would be more expensive than hanging copper from pylons, but it would be much more durable, would require much less maintenance and would be able to cope with rapidly increasing demand in the future if we have not predicted our future use accurately.

The conversation got even more technical from there so I won’t go on because I’ll misrepresent the arguments. The point is not that I’ve come up with a brilliant wheeze to ‘solve electricity’ that no-one else has thought of. It might not be a good idea for other reasons. But this is something like what I think our electricity grid would look like if it was being designed by a Joseph Bazalgette character.

The outcome would be a grid with perhaps three times the capacity of the one we are building now but for something like same price as if we were putting that one in underground rather than over pylons. And without lightning, wind, landslides, birds and all the rest, the maintenance bill would be negligible (for the transmission side of things – distribution is different, as I keep being reminded…).

What we’re doing is leaving ourselves a bigger bill tomorrow and the day after, and an even bigger bill for our children, and if there is any need to expand capacity in 30 or 40 years we leave a much bigger bill for our grandchildren. Oh, and the future-proofed method doesn’t spoil beautiful views or anger people who have to live with the infrastructure. There is no big charitable fund to buy community consent for pylons like there is for wind farms.

The most acute example of our ‘patch it up and make do’ approach must surely be the Rest and Be Thankful where, seemingly to avoid one big engineering bill we have been pursuing smaller-scale project after smaller-scale project to prevent landslides closing the road (£16 million just for consultants…). They have failed, but they have still accumulated a cost that could almost certainly have built a tunnel in the first place. Which would have been Job done.

I’ve been thinking about this a lot of late. For my own entertainment I have been building an eco-utopia in my head (yes, I know…). One of my conclusions is simple; a good society is a low-maintenance society. You’ll always need maintenance and when it needs done it needs done properly.

But if you build everything in a shoddy way then in truth you spend its lifecycle not so much maintaining it as repairing and repairing the poor quality work. And by shoddy I don’t just mean not fit for purpose, I mean built in a way that it might be fit for purpose at first but everyone knows it won’t still be fit for purpose by the end of its reasonable lifespan.

So if you spend just a little more at the outset to produce a better outcome, in the long run it almost certainly saves money, time and effort. But (and this is one of the fundamental problems with neoliberal capitalism) it may not save you money. It might be the next generation that benefits. The neoliberal assault on the idea of capital borrowing is the problem.

We still behave as if infrastructure which should be built to survive a hundred years ought to be paid for in ten. It’s almost like we’re saying ‘sod my grandchildren – why should I pay tax to build a school big enough so that when their kids go there is a desk for them?’, or ‘to hell with the 2050s, if they want electricity they can redo all the grid at their own expense’.

It is the stupidity of money, the corrosive mess that is the financialisation-of-everything, the reductive failure of short-termism. It is exactly the same principle behind our disposable consumerism – buy a less good thing that you’ll need to replace three times over the same time that one thing costing 30 per cent more would keep working.

It is the false effect of money. A million pounds can buy you a carbon negative, close-to-passivhaus-standard terrace of five houses or it can buy you a trip into space on a commercial rocket. And the day after you come back from your space trip, the houses are still there. They’re still there 50 years later.

Money-is-money-is-money, right? But the things you buy with money behave very differently. Some have intrinsic value that endures, some have intrinsic value that increases, some have intrinsic value that disappears. But the money is the same.

So in this financialised world it makes ‘sense’ to have the Scottish Futures Trust which is there to find clever-clever financial tricks and schemes to build public infrastructure in the private sector on a cost-saving basis. In a sane world you’d design infrastructure to be as future-proofed as possible and you’d spread the cost over its lifetime, without even thinking about it, because it is a real, meaningful capital investment with real, meaningful returns over its duration.

After all, that’s what the Victorians did and there is so much to thank them for. Us? Really, what do you think our children will thank us for building? Probably that one bridge, certainly not the hospitals or many of the schools or sports centres or the electricity grid. Instead they’re going to look at what we did and think ‘those tight-fisted bastards left it all on us’.

It isn’t much of a legacy, is it? The economics don’t make sense, the finance doesn’t make sense, the social and economic impact don’t make sense – and yet still we build a substandard future. Expensive-to-maintain electricity pylons that do so much to impact on parts of rural Scotland do not need to be there. There is a better option, if we were a better generation.