Signatures 209 total
-
1
Name: John Atkinson on Apr 12, 2011Comments: Please take into account the feelings and fears of all local people in making the final decisions on the use of the Augean landfill site near Kings Cliffe, in not allowing the dumping of radioactive waste now or in the future at this facility.Flag
-
2
Name: Theodore Gillick on Apr 12, 2011Comments:Flag
-
3
Name: Sandra Johnson on Apr 12, 2011Comments: The proposed site is NOT suitable, it is an open site with very little security, it lies on a major acquifer for the East Midlands. The European Commission Report clearly states that radioactive gasses will escape from the site. How can this be good for the local environment? There is clearly potential for contamination to enter crops making cerials and meat produced in the area less attractive to buyers, thereby having a dramatic efffect on the farming community and the local economy. The site is close to the major towns of Stamford, Corby and the City of Peterborough it is NOT in a sparsly populated remote area. Augean have no experience in this field and it is impossible to be 100% sure that the health of local residents will not be affected. We already suffer from higher than average levels of radon gas which is known to cause cancer. It is claimed that the levels of radiation are significanly lower than those aborbed by the body when undergoing an x-ray, but for most people this is a 'one off' event, the radiactive waste and its contamination will be present in the area for the rest of our lives and the lives of our decendants. How much radiation can the body absorb before it starts to affect health and what impact will the potential increase in serious health problems have on the Health Service and local support services, particulary when the Government are keen to cut back spending in all areas? Surely the physical and mental wellbeing of the residents must be a priority. Regardless of how 'safe' the waste is claimed to be the public perception is that radiation is NOT safe, this has become even more apparent over the last few weeks since the disaster in Japan. The disposal of radioactive waste at this site could potentially affect the popularity of the area to young familes and will undoubtedly affect tourism, a major source of income to the local towns and villages. Who wants spend their holiday in an area close to a radioactive tip? Any failure of Government to listen to the local community will be seen to contradict their 'Localism Bill' and make a mockery their 'Big Society' ideas. I strongly urge the Secretary of State to reject Augean's appeal.Flag
-
4
Name: Hilary Blunt on Apr 12, 2011Comments: No thank you!Flag
-
5
Name: Sarah Weeks on Apr 12, 2011Comments:Flag
-
6
Name: Anonymous on Apr 12, 2011Comments:Flag
-
7
Name: Chris Leuchars on Apr 12, 2011Comments:Flag
-
8
Name: Michael Pratt on Apr 12, 2011Comments: I believe that this will be a total disaster and should not be permitted.Flag
-
9
Name: ALison Curtis on Apr 12, 2011Comments: Let Scotland deal with their waste on their soil.Flag
-
10
Name: John Curtis on Apr 12, 2011Comments: Let the Scots deal with their waste on their soilFlag
-
11
Name: Paul Johnson on Apr 12, 2011Comments: The site is totally unsuitable as it is on an aquifer which serves the local area and transport impact will be immense. Would it not be better to store radioactive waste near or next to a site which already has radioactive activity such as Sizewell or Sellafield.Flag
-
12
Name: Brian Andrews on Apr 12, 2011Comments: Having kept a vigilant eye on this waste facility since its opening, I have very little faith in a company that has chosen this site as the 'least cost option' with little or no regard for the well being of the surrounding villages. Voting against this is a no-brainer. Why would anybody want it otherwise?Flag
-
13
Name: Liz Scott on Apr 12, 2011Comments:Flag
-
14
Name: Diane Stewart on Apr 12, 2011Comments: It is absolutely frightening that a company like Augean, who have no nuclear waste experience or any staff on their books that have dealt with nuclear waste can be allowed to even think of managing a dump in the middle of a rural residential area. The environment is not suitable and the ground is unstable.Flag
-
15
Name: Jane Holmes on Apr 12, 2011Comments:Flag
-
16
Name: Thornton Holmes on Apr 12, 2011Comments:Flag
-
17
Name: Lucy Hurst on Apr 12, 2011Comments:Flag
-
18
Name: Elizabeth Conboy on Apr 12, 2011Comments:Flag
-
19
Name: Andrew Wade on Apr 12, 2011Comments: NO THANKS to NUCLEAR waste!!!!Flag
-
20
Name: Maggie Scott on Apr 12, 2011Comments:Flag
-
21
Name: James Hurst on Apr 12, 2011Comments:Flag
-
22
Name: Jon Whowell MCIPR on Apr 12, 2011Comments: I live about 6 miles from the proposed site but I am concerned that this seems to being rushed through. Mr Pickles says over and over agin how much he is favour of local decisions lets hope he sticks to his agenda on this one.Flag
-
23
Name: Carolyn Mutter on Apr 12, 2011Comments: Public opinion and evidence is clear. This would not be just a local disaster but a countrywide one!Flag
-
24
Name: Mary-Anne Andrews on Apr 12, 2011Comments: 1. Although the radio active waste is designated as low level today, history has a habit of reassessing what constitutes safe levels. The Christmas Island Nuclear test is an example when servicemen were told merely to don sun glasses to counter the effects of the atomic bomb blast. Asbestos used to be designated so safe that Primary schools were built with it. How much Low Level waste in one place then becomes high level? 2. The Proximity Principle for the disposal of hazardous waste is being disregarded as, according to Augean, the waste will come from as far afield as Dounreay in Scotland, Wylfa on Anglesey,Devonport and Sizewell. The point of the Proximity Principle is to dispose of waste as close as possible to the point of origin to reduce the environmental impact of transportation and to discourage the production of such waste. Will it be travelling through your neighbourhood? 3.On BBC 18th May 2010 The prime minister and his Lib Dem deputy said that the Big Society means that people should have more say over planning decisions. As a community, through our District & County Councils, we have already given our reply to the unreasonable request by Augean to dump the Country's nuclear waste here in Northamptonshire. If Eric Pickles overturns this refusal he will be making a mockery of both the Big Society Programme and of his role as Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government.Flag
-
25
Name: P Clayton on Apr 12, 2011Comments: Augean's plans would appear to be fatally flawed in disposing nuclear waste over an aquifer and having sinkholes around the site. Site security appears to be virtually non-existant with easy access from the surrounding area. Any flytipper would have little difficulty in dumping highly toxic waste there and the operators could be none the wiser. How can the operators be trusted to self-monitor? The local population have already stated their opposition in the various referenda and given the government's enthusiasm for localism how can the government envisage allowing Augean to proceed?Flag
-
26
Name: Tom Holmes on Apr 12, 2011Comments:Flag
-
27
Name: Dave Sones on Apr 12, 2011Comments: This is an unacceptable proposition, not only for the reasons stated in the petition, but also because of the potential future consequences. There appears to be no iron-clad guarantee regarding the ultimate period when dumping will be permitted, nor an absolutely essential government commitment that under no circumstances will there ever be any amendment to the licence which could allow dumping of waste with higher levels of radiation.Flag
-
28
Name: Andy Couzens on Apr 12, 2011Comments:Flag
-
29
Name: Andy Dixon on Apr 12, 2011Comments:Flag
-
30
Name: June Brennan on Apr 12, 2011Comments: As per my correspondence to Eric Pickles and Nick Boles I totally reject any dumping of radioactive waste. I live in Stamford which is in the 5 miles radius.Flag
-
31
Name: Jim Cardell on Apr 12, 2011Comments: Reject the appeal !Flag
-
32
Name: John Little on Apr 12, 2011Comments: Please reject this awful proposal to dump radioactive waste in this area, and I agree that it should be dumped within close proximity of it's production.Flag
-
33
Name: Robert Vipan on Apr 13, 2011Comments: I live about 1.5 miles from the dump and am strongly against any neuclear waste on this site. It should be dumped at the sites that create it to sve risks of transport and to local residents here.Flag
-
34
Name: Margaret Vipan on Apr 13, 2011Comments:Flag
-
35
Name: Tom Mutter on Apr 13, 2011Comments:Flag
-
36
Name: Danielle Mutter on Apr 13, 2011Comments:Flag
-
37
Name: Anonymous on Apr 13, 2011Comments:Flag
-
38
Name: Amorita Harris on Apr 13, 2011Comments:Flag
-
39
Name: Colin Lowe on Apr 13, 2011Comments: Tell Scotland, and anyone else, to keep their own nuclear waste.Flag
-
40
Name: Helen Simpson on Apr 13, 2011Comments:Flag
-
41
Name: J GEORGE SMID on Apr 13, 2011Comments: We are constantly assured Low Level Radioactive waste is safe. The same assurance received the residents in Corby when their 'low level' chemical waste was treated locally. Only after number of deformed children were born the Council accepted liability. Public enquiry revealed number of shortcomings in assessing the safety in the first place. Radioactive 'Low Level' waste is a newly defined category; plastic bags as a satisfactory containment of radioactive waste is a new proposition; self-policing of the site by Augean is a new process. Despite that the site is not treated as an experimental site, but as a commercial enterprise. This imposes unacceptable risk to the local community.Flag
-
42
Name: Anonymous on Apr 13, 2011Comments:Flag
-
43
Name: Fiona Radic on Apr 13, 2011Comments:Flag
-
44
Name: Richard Christopher on Apr 13, 2011Comments:Flag
-
45
Name: Trina Warman on Apr 13, 2011Comments:Flag
-
46
Name: Ruth Magowan on Apr 13, 2011Comments:Flag
-
47
Name: M.HOTHI on Apr 13, 2011Comments:Flag
-
48
Name: Harvey Blunt on Apr 13, 2011Comments:Flag
-
49
Name: Wilfred Pickles on Apr 13, 2011Comments:Flag
-
50
Name: Barry And Diana Tem0pest on Apr 13, 2011Comments: The local community has expressed its united opposition to this dumping for several years. Surely it must be rejected now.Flag