An Taisce, AP 1000, clean water, dangers of nuclear, EDF, Engie, environment, EPR, France, Germany, Green Party, Green Party Ireland, Hinkley Point, Hinkley Point C, Ireland, Irish Green Party, Mark Dearey, Moorside Nuclear Power Station, Northern Ireland, nuclear, nuclear accident, nuclear disaster, nuclear energy, nuclear power, nuclear power plant, nuclear reactors, nuclear safety, NuGen, Republic of Ireland, Sellafield, UK, water, Westinghouse Toshiba
Note that if the Government of Ireland fails to act promptly, then the people of Ireland, as well as those in other impacted countries, may complain to the UN under the Aarhus Convention, as explained below the News Release. In fact, members of the public do not have to wait, but can act now if they wish. Their rights have already been violated.
News Release from The Green Party, Ireland:
“Greens urge Government to insist on Hinkley consultation following UNESC ruling 9th May 2016
The Green Party today accused the United Nations Economic and Social Council of ‘pulling punches’, following their finding that Britain has breached the Espoo convention, but failure to deliver a recommendation.
UNESC found that Britain failed to notify neighbouring states and the general public of the threat of trans-boundary nuclear pollution from Hinkley Point C nuclear power station in the event of a major accident or to provide a consultation process for the public.
Commenting on the developments, Green Party Councillor and anti-nuclear campaigner Mark Dearey, said: “The recommendation that Britain now enter into discussion with neighbouring states to decide on ‘whether notification is useful at this stage’ is surprisingly weak as a definitive view would have been appropriate given the findings.
“This has the appearance a pulled punch from the UNESC.
“Nonetheless, Ireland now needs to take the opportunity to insist on a notification process so that we the public, can have our say on the potential threat posed by Hinkley.
“I am sure An Taisce are weighing up their options following their defeat in the UK courts on the same issue last year, but there can be no doubt that this ruling adds significantly to their case should they wish to re-enter it.” https://greenparty.ie/news/greens-urge-government-to-insist-on-hinkley-consultation-following-unesc-ruling “The Green Party (Irish: Comhaontas Glas) is a green party on Ireland that operates in both the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Party_(Ireland)
There are many nuclear accident weather scenarios for Hinkley Point in which Ireland is hit with as much as 1,000,000 Bq/m2 of Cesium 137. For instance see December 17th, December 21st, November 27th and Sept. 6th in the model (based on weather in 1995): http://flexrisk.boku.ac.at/en/evaluation.phtml#form There are other scenarios, of course, where other countries are very badly hit. This is for one of the existing Hinkley Point nuclear reactors. The new ones would be over twice as powerful and therefore impacts would probably be greater.
Complaint needs to be made, as well, regarding the proposed Moorside Nuclear Power Station, further up the coast on the Irish Sea. See: https://mariannewildart.wordpress.com/2016/05/15/letter-to-the-united-nations-moorside-boreholes-no-consultation If you are in Northern Ireland or Britain or in much of Europe your right to environmental impact study, public consultation, is being actively ignored at Moorside, and you may complain to the UN under the Aarhus Convention.
Locations of proposed nuclear power stations exported from Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hinkley_Point_C_nuclear_power_station https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moorside_Nuclear_Power_Station
While Espoo deals with the need for states to notify other states, who then should notify their populations, concerned public can complain directly under Aarhus on the need for environmental impact study-public consultation:
From a 22 page Presentation “Transboundary Access to Justice – Some Austrian experience“, by Thomas ALGE OEKOBUERO Justice and Environment 15. Oct 2010, Berlin: “Espoo Convention and EU-directive 2003/35/EC request agreement of other state for consultations (Art 7 par 2 EIA-directive)
– But Aarhus Convention not: it refers to the public concerned/and principle of non discrimination…
Article 2 par 5 Aarhus Convention 5. “The public concerned” means the public affected or likely to be affected by, or having an interest in, (…)” including NGOs in any case
Article 3 par 9 Aarhus Convention 9: (…) have access to justice in environmental matters without discrimination as to citizenship, nationality or domicile and, in the case of a legal person, without discrimination as to where it has its registered seat or an effective centre of its activities” https://www.umweltbundesamt.de/sites/default/files/medien/419/dokumente/country_report_austria_alge.pdf
“The United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters was adopted on 25 June 1998 in the Danish city of Aarhus (Århus) at the Fourth Ministerial Conference as part of the “Environment for Europe” process. It entered into force on 30 October 2001.
The Aarhus Convention establishes a number of rights of the public (individuals and their associations) with regard to the environment. The Parties to the Convention are required to make the necessary provisions so that public authorities (at national, regional or local level) will contribute to these rights to become effective. The Convention provides for:
the right of everyone to receive environmental information that is held by public authorities (“access to environmental information”). This can include information on the state of the environment, but also on policies or measures taken, or on the state of human health and safety where this can be affected by the state of the environment. Applicants are entitled to obtain this information within one month of the request and without having to say why they require it. In addition, public authorities are obliged, under the Convention, to actively disseminate environmental information in their possession;
the right to participate in environmental decision-making. Arrangements are to be made by public authorities to enable the public affected and environmental non-governmental organisations to comment on, for example, proposals for projects affecting the environment, or plans and programmes relating to the environment, these comments to be taken into due account in decision-making, and information to be provided on the final decisions and the reasons for it (“public participation in environmental decision-making”);
the right to review procedures to challenge public decisions that have been made without respecting the two aforementioned rights or environmental law in general (“access to justice”).
Last updated: 10/03/2016” http://ec.europa.eu/environment/aarhus/ (Emphasis added; More information at link).
Forty-Seven Countries have signed the Aarhus Convention: https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=XXVII-13&chapter=27&lang=en
For complaining under Aarhus: “Communications received by the secretariat prior to 17 May 2016 will be considered for preliminary admissibility at the 53rd meeting of the Committee (Geneva, 21-24 June 2016) so long as they are complete, in the required format and no translation is needed. Communications not considered for preliminary admissibility at the 53rd meeting may be considered for preliminary admissibility at the Committee’s 54th meeting in September 2016. The communications to be considered for preliminary admissibility at each meeting will be posted on this page no later than three weeks prior to the meeting. Communications not considered for preliminary admissibility at the 53rd meeting may be considered for preliminary admissibility at the Committee’s 54th meeting in September 2016.” http://www.unece.org/env/pp/cc/com.html
Format and address for complaint (communication) : http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/pp/compliance/Format_for_communications_v13.02.2015.docx
Texts of documents related to Espoo and Aarhus:
German Parliamentarian Sylvia Kotting-Uhl makes the points very clear in her letter of complaint under the Aarhus Convention. She complained as an individual citizen, rather than as a parliamentarian on behalf of the German government. Thus, she is complaining under Aarhus: http://kotting-uhl.de/site/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/2013-06-12_Sylvia_Kotting-Uhl_-Communication-to-the-Aarhus-Coventions-Compliance-Committee.pdf