Israel Nuclear Plant Under Threat! What Plant?

Now who on earth in one of the almost most continuous war zones of the last 60 years would put a "top secret" nuclear plant within missile range of your most volatile neighbours. Israel that's who.

The fact that the Times has got hold of the information of this top secret facility is one thing. That Israel has one is another and that it is within range of the rockets, which have shocked Israeli intelligence as to their sophistication and range is another.

The problem is that Israel despite ceding land to the Palestinians have tried to maintain a tight grip on things. The repressive border controls, including the wall and preparedness for war with their nearest neighbours does not make for good international relations. When Robert Frost wrote that "Good wall make for good neighbours" he was being somewhat ironic. While they are essential in the countryside they lead to all sorts of disputes in urban or international settings.

How many of us know of some dispute over boundaries in a urban setting near us? Which have arisen as land has been sub-divided into smaller and smaller clumps. Internationally the Iron Curtain epitomised by the Berlin Wall has been down these last 20 years. We've been relying on communist China for financial assistance in the West over recent years. Even the wall between the USA and Cuba (who celebrate 50 years of the revolution) may be on the verge of being broken down.

Yet the siege mentality that the Israeli state have been in since their inception 60 years ago is not doing them many favours. It brings us to the point that Israel had a top secret nuclear plant. The USA most have known about this yet in North Korea or Iran they come down hard on such things. Yet in the volatile Middle East, their good friends the Israelis appear to have developed one. Top secret nuclear facilities generally mean one thing armaments. If we don't want Iran to have nuclear weapons to be able to launch on Israel why have we been allowing Israel to work on the same it just doesn't make sense.

But then when over recent years has US foreign policy made sense? Step up to the plate Barack and give us a change.

Westminster Attacking Devolution

Well Westminster is clearly attacking Scottish devolved powers both over Trident placement and new nuclear power stations. In two submissions made to the Calman commission according to reports in the Scotsman today.

Over Trident's placement there is cross party opposition, north of the border, to Trident's replacement, which is currently situated on the Clyde. In June last year Holyrood passed a motion recognising that defence was reserved but opposing the government's decision to maintain the deterrent capability.

The disagreement over energy provision, which is a fully devolved issue is that successive Scottish Parliaments have set far higher renewable energy targets than Westminster, have sought to achieve this without the use of new nuclear stations. Something that is achievable through the wealth of Scotland’s many natural resources. Indeed with the correct blend of generation systems continuity of supply can be maintained. Something that the wind dominated Westminster mindset fails to realise. The need for nuclear and for it's placement to have to be in Scotland are two fallacies that Labour in Westminster are trying to propagate.

However, Labour were one of the parties that launched the Calman commission into Scotland's devolved powers. But now their Westminster mandarins appear to be pulling in on the leash. Are London Labour doing this out of cowardice of the SNP?

Reigning in powers in Scotland is not the way Labour should be looking to counter a SNP threat. Giving more power while within the union mitigates against the need for independence, but Labour seem to be backed up to thier own wicket by Alex Salmond and seem incapable of seeing beyond their noses just now. Merely playing defensive strokes as far as Scotland is concerned, unable to come down the crease and attack.

Volunteer to be a Nuclear Dumping Ground

David Miliband the 'Wayne Rooney' of Tony Blair's cabinet want to sweep the issue of the waste created by nuclear power station under the carpet, or at least under the ground in a willing local authority.

Obviously after decades of consideration weighing this up this has been considered the safest option open to the government. That is clearly why they will be offering hte willing local authority a multi-million pound bribe, sorry, investment incentive to volunteer. Of course the officers of the local authority who agree to having the nuclear depository built in their area will propably be long out of office by the time it comes online, as it is expected to take 40 years to construct the at least 500 metre deep dumping ground. So obviously it will be as 'safe' as houses then.

The previous attempt to try and get a deep nuclear dumping site established was scraped in the 1980s due to public resistance. Of course then public awareness was far more worried of nuclear fallout coming from the sky if America and Russia got a little too heated.

Of course the best way to avoid having to dispose of nuclear waste is to avoid creating new nuclear power stations. There is plenty of options for other energys to be utilised that will reduce our countries carbon footprint and be safer and cleaner to use.

Power Station May Silence McConnell's Plans

Oh dear what can the matter be, poor old Jack has had a catastophe.

The First Minister said that he hoped to extend the life of the Torness and Hunterston nucleur power stations. Only for the aging reactors to say dear Mr McConnell we really are starting to crack up a should be allowed to retire gracefully.

The nucleur safety watchdog has uncovered cracks at six reactors across the UK including Hunterston B in Ayrshire. They have warned that a radioactive leak could be "inevitable" if action was not taken about these. There are claims that this should halt any suggestion of extending the life but British Energy deny this is the case. However David Howarth, the Liberal Democrats' energy spokesman said:

"This could spell an earlier end to nuclear plants, rather than an extension of their life-cycle that the government had hoped for.

"The evidence is mounting that the government is taking a huge gamble by pushing for a new generation of nuclear power plants.

"Over-reliance on large, centralised and risky nuclear plants could seriously threaten our electricity supplies if one or more reactor is shut down due to these sort of safety concerns."

In the Name of the Father

The latest critic of Gordon Brown's decision to seek out a replacement for Trident comes from the Moderator of the Church of Scotland. The Right Rev Alan McDonald says that he doubts that Mr Brown's father, the late Rev Dr John Brown, whose name Gordon invoked on the eve of Veteren's Day in his address at St Bryce Kirk, would have agreed.

The Moderator said that as for the actual view of Rev Brown he can not be sure but he stated the Church of Scotland has been opposed to nuclear weapons for 25 years. He went on to say in a cutting remark:

"The Chancellor is due great credit for his part in the Make Poverty History Campaign.

"However, what is the point of making poverty history if you then effectively target the poor, and everybody else in the world, with nuclear weapons?

"And ... how much aid for the developing world could you buy with £25 billion? How many lives could be saved?"

Last night a spokesman for the Chancellor was saying that 'the fullest possible debate' would take place on this matter before a decision is made. So in that case what exactly was meant by the Chancellors statement last Wednesday?

Farewell to Prudence and the Nuclear Family

Gordon Brown may be about the become part of a nuclear family when he wife delivers a second child, we all hope safely again this time. But his opther recent nucleur comments on a replacement for Trident are going to take a bit of explaining.

Nick Robinson the BBC's political editor is on the ball today. He has found out that one Labour backbench rebel in 1984 described Britain's nucleur deterrent as:

"Unacceptably expensive, economically wasteful and militarily unsound."

Maybe that back bencher should have words with the Chancellor about his fears if only that back bencher wasn't the newly returned member in 1983 for Dunfermline East who now sits for Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath the one and the same Gordon Brown.

Green Men Speak with Forked Tongue

Oh dear they claim to talk the talk but clearly neither of them walk the walk.

David Chamelons new green caring Conservatives clearly are not even prepared to talk about key issues. The had agreed to discuss environmental policies with the Liberal Democrats but when they failed to commit on issues such as nucleur power and climate change levy Sir Menzies Campbell pulled the Lib Dems out of the discussions.

Tony Blair doesn't fare any better this morning. The Soctsman reports that the Environment Agency are upset that he is not looking at a technology neutral approach to cutting carbon ommissions. With Nuclear Blairs favouring of new nucleur power stations the agency is concerned that all types of low-carbon power generation, including also wind, wave, biomass, geothermal and solar, are being overlooked.

Mr Clive Bates of the Environment Agency says:

"[Mr Blair] amy not be listening to our advice.

We are concerned about the displacement effect of a large programme of investment in one capital-intensive technology like nucleur may have on energy efficiency and renewable technology."

The agency's warning was echoed by Sir Menzies Campbell, the Liberal Democrat leader, who yesterday told an audience of business leaders:

"Investment in nuclear will discourage investment in other technologies that could supply capacity."

With the news that Scotland is ahead of reaching its renewable energy generation target and England and Wales lagging behind it is clear that only with Liberal Democrats in power can people get a government that actually has an impact on the environment. The only difference that Scotland has is the Liberal Democrat thrust that green issues affect all areas of goverenance and as such have got this included in every area of Scottish policy making.

Scotland can be Green Hub of Europe

Nicol Stephen has laid down a challenge to Labour over nuclear power for Soctland. He stated that the Scottish Liberal Democrats will be distancing themselves from the policy that Labour are veering towards which is embracing new nuclear power stations for Scotland.

Nicol said that Scotland is ideally poised to harness its unrivalled potential in wind, wave and tidal power to make a major contribution to climate change. He announced that biomass, marine, offshore wind and hydrogen developments would be targeted with an additional £20 million funding support to ensure that Scotland's natural resources can be fully exploited.

While Tony Blair is making statements that nuclear power is the way to go and Scottish Labour are looking at a three pronged approach to energy provision including to "keep options open" for new nuclear power stations, this is a clear statement of intent. Scotland can beat the targets for clean energy creation by renewables without falling back on nuclear, which at present will still leave an unsatisfactory legacy for generations to come.