A British government report outlining how it intends to reduce UK radioactive discharges into the sea "lacks substance", it has been claimed.
The environmental group and an MEP, Mr Jim Fitzsimons (FF), have called on Britain to draw up a new plan reflecting the spirit of an international agreement it signed in 1998 to all but eliminate marine discharges by 2020.
The British proposal is to be considered next week in Luxembourg at a meeting of the OSPAR working group on radioactive substances, which has a key role in implementing the agreement to reduce discharges in the north Atlantic to near zero. Fifteen states signed the OSPAR Convention on marine pollution including Ireland.
Under the Sintra declaration of 1998, the UK was required to work towards achieving substantial reductions or elimination of radioactive discharges by this year in order to ensure "near zero concentrations" of man-made radioactive substances in the environment by 2020. Most of these discharges come from reprocessing facilities at Sellafield and La Hague in France.
Dr Helen Wallace, of Greenpeace, said the UK's submission to OSPAR combined with its recent decision to approve new Sellafield discharges showed it was not taking its commitments seriously. "The Irish Government and other countries who continue to be affected by discharges need to make them stick to what was proposed," she said.
The OSPAR agreement meant a "substantial reduction commitment" by this year.. This was interpreted to mean visible signs of action, certainly by next June when a full OSPAR meeting takes place in Copenhagen.
In this context, the UK had proposed "a plan on how it would produce a plan", with no concrete action and only a commitment to public consultation, Dr Wallace added, which meant the OSPAR timetable was seriously behind schedule.
It had even suggested "there has been no pollution of the marine environment from authorised UK radioactive discharges and emissions". This contrasted with the position of British ministers at the Sintra negotiations, she said.
But a report commissioned by the OSPAR group due to go before the June meeting would expose the British position, she predicted, as it would show the extent to which reprocessing, as opposed to nuclear storage, was contributing to marine discharges. The UK submission to the working group was supposed to be a framework on how it would deliver on its OSPAR commitments, but was "incomplete and lacking in substance", Mr Fitzsimons said.
"There is not one substantive or specific commitment in the 17-page submission outlining exactly the timeframe for the reduction in levels of radioactive substances which will be disposed of in the OSPAR maritime area."
Notwithstanding such shortcomings, the MEP noted the recognition "for once" by the UK government of a nuclear legacy as a result of activities at Sellafield and Dounreay.
"It's the first time to my knowledge that I have seen a British government link Sellafield with the nuclear white elephant at Dounreay, for which a timeframe has been put in place for its closure," he said.
Despite the absence of a timeframe the document agrees "radioactive waste should be managed and disposed of in ways to protect the public, the workforce and the environment".
