Letter from Eddie Martin to the Chairman of CORWM

Dear Professor Williams,

Several weeks ago (10th May 2014) I wrote a comprehensive letter to you and your colleagues expressing in detail both the observations and concerns of the Cumbria Trust members regarding the siting of a GDF here in Cumbria.  I was assured by your secretariat that my letter had, indeed, been distributed to you and your CoRWM colleagues.

It is most disappointing, therefore, that not only have I not received a response to the many carefully-considered points raised but that I have not even received an acknowledgement of my letter. The Cumbria Trust offered to meet with you (and your colleagues) to discuss further the many concerns we have; that invitation remains open.

Since then your colleague, Professor Rebecca Lunn, has given a lecture to the Geological Society, details of which are advertised on the CoRWM web site.  Unfortunately,  Professor Lunn’s MRWS data  on the response from the local population were inaccurate. Contrary to her assertions: Don’t forget Moray (sic) Poll showed public in favour!”,  the MORI poll did no such thing. In addition, of the Allerdale and Copeland parish councils which responded to the consultation, a significant majority were firmly against proceeding to Stage 4.   Professor Lunn does not mention, either, that the SKB/KBS3 ‘packaging’ proposals, as engineered safety barriers, are now being seriously questioned because of the apparent anaerobic corrosion of the copper component; neither does she mention the serious leak at the WIPP installation which caused radioactive material to be carried several miles from the site, both of which might clearly compromise GDF proposals in the UK and in which events, I assume, the Geological Society’s invited audience might have had more than a passing interest.

Yet the lecture content is proclaimed and promoted on the CoRWM web site which, in effect, gives CoRWM ownership of the (incomplete/inaccurate/invalid) material.  I find this very disturbing – as does the Directorial Board of the Cumbria Trust, such that a couple of my colleagues have taken up these inaccuracies/omissions directly with Professor Lunn. Even more disturbing is that CoRWM is advising government Ministers with at least one member of the committee using factually incorrect data.

We would be grateful for a considered response. In case you have mislaid the original letter, I enclose a further copy.

Eddie Martin

Chairman of the Cumbria Trust

Original letter to CoRWM