Tuesday, October 30, 2012

Some Red Flags

The Nuclear Waste topic has been hot the last few days on the "Let's Rebuild Hornepayne" Facebook Group.

I've always claimed to be on the fence concerning this issue. These past few days have been a real eye opener. I don't believe we're being told the full truth and for that reason I'm not for this anymore. Where there's lies and secrets there's stuff being concealed and hidden. I don't think this is good for Hornepayne or the North.
We're being forced into this because it's the only visible option we're being given for a better economy. There is no other choice being presented to the People of Hornepayne. We're made to think that if we want jobs, population increases, businesses, ground studies, scientist, paved roads, traffic lights, this is the answer and we'll never have those things without Nuclear Waste. It's the only answer to everything we want. When it comes to our future our choice is Nuclear Waste or what we have now (Nothing), and many rather have nothing than have Nuclear Waste buried in our back yard. I said right off the bat, I want options. If Hornepayne can have everything we desire without choosing Nuclear Waste who would consider it? Other communities grow by developing and following a strategic economic plan. They create a vision and they take steps to get there. We're not doing this because we have one thing in our site- Nuclear Waste. It's easy. It's free. Our leader can reap without lifting a finger. We're already seeing the $$$ flow into our Community.

Another thing is the community was told that the liaison committee would be made up of people who are both for and against this. We were told that both sides would be represented.  Are both sides evenly represented? It doesn't seem to be and that's a BIG RED FLAG for me. I would have liked to see a Councillor for and against, but instead the two most zealous men on Town Council sit on the committee.  

Not much info is being released about the committee's activities. To know anything we're told to attend meetings and no questions are answered unless we send in specific questions. I asked the other day what the worse case scenario is. That's a question that I would have expected the committee to have already asked and the truthful answer made public. I would have expected our Town Council to have asked that question before they even chose to explore this option.

The website is there but it's a skeleton IMO. It doesn't give me much information about the committee's activities. If I have to attend meetings to obtain information, I'll go without. I thought the liaison committee was appointed to find stuff out and release the info into the community. I've sent an email to the office asking what questions the committee has forwarded to NWMO so far. I await that reply. Surely the committee has asked a lot of questions in the last year and yet our computer screens are not flooded with answers.

Some would like us to pull out now because they know the longer we stay in this process the longer NWMO has to sway people away from what they believe. We're being promised the world and it's going to get harder and harder to stay "no" to all of it.

This article is a real eye opener. A Must read.

by Pat McNamara September 25, 2012


I found this stated in their own minutes. It seems to me the NWMO liaison committee is not permitted to release whatever they want to the public and yet I thought the committee was put together for that reason alone. It seems to me that they want to encourage transparency but  they're governed by the NWMO. Yikes.
"Committee voiced concerns that we are not keeping our committee activities public and visible enough. The question was asked what can the committee publicize, what will be the procedure and process to release information to the community? The CLC would like to be able to publish on a local level the activities of our committee. The publishing of upcoming events and information about our committee activities, which will continue to engage the community, reassure transparency and foster trust between the community and the CLC. The committee will publish only information and activities of the CLC staying away from factual information. The committee will continue to send all published material to NWMO."http://clcinfo.ca/hornepayne/files/2012/08/NWCLC-Minutes-05-03-12.pdf    
The following was a question that was asked by the committee to NWMO. I's true that Nuclear Waste is not a liquid or a gas. But, it's not nuclear waste that we're concerned about- it's the High Level Radiation that comes attatched to the waste that the question was referring to. Radiation is not a solid, liquid, or gas and yet it CAN leak into the environment. In my opinion their answer was deceptive.
Question # 11..... What if there is a leak? Do we know how to deal with it? What will happen to our health and to our community IF that happened?
A. Nuclear fuel waste is not a liquid. It is not a gas. It does not leak. It cannot explode. Canada’s plan for managing used nuclear fuel relies on multiple man-made and natural barriers to isolate and contain used fuel over the long term. If one of the barriers fails, there are multiple other barriers to isolate and contain the material. In order to obtain licences to construct and operate the deep geological repository the NWMO will have to demonstrate its safety to the satisfaction of citizens and the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission. The repository will be monitored and the used fuel will remain retrievable for an extended period of time."

November 8th, 2012
In the original blog post I made this statement:

"I know from applying that each applicant had to state if they were for it or against it in their application letter. Was anyone selected that stated they were not for this?"

It was pointed out to me that the above statement is untrue as the advertizement did not require the applicants to make that statement. For that reason I have taken the comment out.

Please note that it was made clear to the community that the CLC would be made up of people who are both for and against. This statement remains.

Please accept my apologies.



  1. This comment has been removed by the author.

  2. This comment has been removed by the author.

  3. This comment has been removed by the author.

  4. This comment has been removed by the author.

  5. This comment has been removed by the author.

  6. This comment has been removed by the author.