Emails to Paul Wood - 28 May Event

Emails to Paul Wood – 28 May Event

From Me: 2012-05-09

Where is the meeting to be held?

Also there are various community groups who would like to put their point of view across at the event. This would be in the form of displays and printed material. I would appreciate it if you would contact us about how we would be able to do this.

The following groups would be interested.

Pete

From Paul Wood 2012-05-10

Peter

The event is being organised as an opportunity for local stakeholder groups to tell the two councils organising the day their opinions about a possible third power station at Sizewell, and what the potential benefits and disadvantages of such a development would be. The goal of the day is to enable those groups to be better informed about how they can make their voice heard on the issues that matter to them during the potential consultation periods, and for the Councils to have a clearer perspective on what those local issues are so they can champion them when they too are consulted.

As such, it would be inappropriate for any displays or banners to be at the event to be about those merits or risks. There have been and will continue to be many opportunities and public events where such discussions have been, and will in future be, the right forum for such discussions. The event on May 28 is deliberately focussed on sharing information with and from our communities and preparing them if an application is submitted by EDF.

Regards

Paul

_______________________________
Paul Wood
Sizewell C Project Manager
Suffolk Coastal & Suffolk County Council
t:Â Â 01394 444632

From Me 2012-05-12

Our aim is also to make stakeholders better informed about the potential benefits and disadvantages. As you are no doubt aware we see many more disadvantages than advantages and hence our opposition to the new build. However, if we are not allowed to make a presentation to the stakeholders the event is likely to be another marketing opportunity for EdF at the tax payers expense. Below are a few of the facts that we would like to present to stakeholders.

25000 Jobs?

We would like to challenge some of EdFs claims such as the 25,000 jobs which has been made in several parts of the media. First of all this is not informative about the economic benefits. Does it include people contracted for an hour? The jobs are spread over at least 60 years and it is important to see how these are spread. More importantly where does this figure come from since EdF are unable or unwilling to cite and source for this figure.

However, there has been independent research done by CITB (Nuclear New Build Employment Scenarios, CITB ConstructionSkills, http://www.cskills.org/sectorskills/researchfromssc/Nuclear_New_Build_Employment_Scenarios.aspx) and Congent (Next Generation â€“ Skills for New Build Nuclear, The Nuclear Energy Skills Alliance http://www.cogent-ssc.com/research/Publications/Renaissance2.pdf). However we need to take into account â€œthe possible substitution of other new generating facilities in the absence of NNB, which would inevitably be an outcome given the energy capacity issues that the UK is facing.â€? Any support for new nuclear build has to be done compared with a cost benefit analysis basis with the money being spent elsewhere. Our more detailed analysis of these issues can be found at http://www.plux.co.uk/jobs-the-weakest-argument-for-nuclear/
If EdF are willing to provide any information at the meeting to support their claims then we would be glad to see it.

Quality Jobs?

We believe that the two current construction projects for EPR (Flamaville and Olkiluoto) provide a useful incite into employment opportunities at the possible Sizewell C. These facts do not look good (for more detail and references see http://www.plux.co.uk/slave-labour-building-nuclear-plants/.)
Three people died in five months at Flamaville due to health and safety failures and a MEP delegation called working conditions at the site â€œa case of modern-day slavery,â€?.
There is a long history of breach of basic trade union rights at the site including dismissing workers for striking over conditions or safety issues both at Olkiluoto and Flamanville.
â€œOlkiluoto has been a complete disappointment for us. There have been fewer than 100 Finnish builders there. It is the view of our experts that huge amounts of cheap labour have been brought here from abroad to work inefficientlyâ€?, Said KyÃ¶sti Suokas, co-chairman of the Finnish Construction Union.

I repeat my request that we are allowed to present our information (fully referenced) to stakeholders.

Peter