Lincolnshire councillors move to end nuclear waste talks
Speaking at the meeting, Councillor Richard Davies, leader of the Conservative opposition proposed recommending the immediate withdrawal from the community partnership, following in the footsteps of East Lindsey District Council, which pulled out in April.He said this would end ongoing uncertainty for residents."We've had five years and we still aren't informing people. We're still in this realm of probably, possibly, it may happen," he said.The search had previously been focused on a former gas terminal in Theddlethorpe.However, NWS later announced it had moved the proposed location of the facility to land between Gayton le Marsh and Great Carlton.Fellow Conservative Councillor Lindsey Cawrey told the meeting: "Our communities have made their feelings clear and the proposal has changed significantly from what was previously suggested."David Fannin, chair of the community partnership, added: "If it had been possible to remove uncertainty, or to exercise a duty of care that mitigated the impact on the local community, I would have been more reassured about staying in the process."But, the council has spoken, local people have spoken up loudly and clearly, and we have to respect that."
In a statement, Simon Hughes, siting and communities director at NWS, said: "The entire GDF siting process is based on community consent and there is an absolute requirement for any potential host community to have given its consent prior to any development being agreed."This conversation can carry on without commitment, but we will fully respect and understand any decision made by the council's executive on 3 June."The GDF would see nuclear waste being stored beneath up to 1,000m (3,300ft) of solid rock until its radioactivity had naturally decayed.Three areas had previously been shortlisted by NWS - Mid Copeland and South Copeland in Cumbria and Lincolnshire, according to the Local Democracy Reporting Service.
Listen to highlights from Lincolnshire on BBC Sounds, watch the latest episode of Look North or tell us about a story you think we should be covering here.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
44 minutes ago
- The Independent
MPs vote to support proscribing Palestine Action as terror group
MPs have backed the government's move to ban the direct action group Palestine Action as a terrorist organisation, despite warnings that this would have a 'chilling effect' on protest. Legislation passed in the Commons yesterday, as MPs voted 385 to 26, a majority of 359 in favour of proscribing the group under the Terrorism Act 2000. While security minister Dan Jarvis told MPs that Palestine Action as not a 'legitimate protest group', others criticised the move and described it as 'draconian overreach' and likened the group to the Suffragettes. Zarah Sultana, the independent MP for Coventry South, told the Commons: 'To equate a spray can of paint with a suicide bomb isn't just absurd, it is grotesque. It is a deliberate distortion of the law to chill dissent, criminalise solidarity and suppress the truth.' The motion is expected to be debated and voted on by the House of Lords today before it becomes law. Meanwhile, pro- Palestine demonstrators have hit out at the government, accusing it of 'hypocrisy' as it prepares to ban an activist group under anti-terror law. The decision to proscribe the group comes after two planes were vandalised at RAF Brize Norton on June 20. Speaking to The Independent while demonstrating outside parliament, David Collins, a retired veteran with no links to Palestine Action and who served with the Marines for nine years, said: 'In comparison to some of the atrocities that this government is approving – and sending arms to Israel – amongst some people that is justified action. They are warplanes that can be repaired. There was nobody hurt. I would say that is a legitimate form of protest.' Jonathan Fluxman, 69, a retired doctor who was also demonstrating on Wednesday, said a ban was 'utterly ridiculous'. 'Palestine action are a direct action group. They are avowedly non-violent and I think this is much more about them embarrassing the British government by being incredibly effective in terms of interrupting the flow of weapons from Britain to Israel to try and stop the awful, awful genocide', he said. Four people, including 'a man who blocked the gates of Downing Street with his mobility scooter', were arrested following the protest in Westminster, the Metropolitan Police has said. On Tuesday, two more arrests were made after Palestine Action claimed to have blockaded the entrance of an Israeli defence company's UK headquarters. A spokesperson for the group said activists had blocked the entrance to Elbit Systems in Bristol and covered it in red paint 'to symbolise Palestinian bloodshed'. Kat, another protester demonstrating outside parliament on Wednesday morning, accused the government of a 'complete clampdown on our right to protest'. She said: 'There are many groups that use the same tactics and have used the same tactics in the past and they've never had this extreme a response to it. I think they're shutting it down because its effective. It is making an impact on the profits of Elbit Systems who is Israel's largest weapons manufacturer.' But home secretary Yvette Cooper said 'violence and serious criminal damage has no place in legitimate protest. The right to protest and the right to free speech are the cornerstone of our democracy and there are countless campaign groups that freely exercise those rights.' The prime minister, Keir Starmer, said the action at RAF Brize Norton was 'disgraceful' and an 'act of vandalism'. While the government is rushing through parliament absurd legislation to proscribe Palestine Action, the real terrorism is being committed in Gaza Palestine Action The shadow home secretary, Chris Philp, also condemned the group, saying: 'This attack on Britain's military is totally unjustified. They are undermining the very organisation that protects us all. Palestine Action should be pursued, prosecuted and banned for what they have done. In this country we settle disagreements through debate and democracy, not through acts of vandalism and violence.' A spokesperson for Palestine Action said: 'While the government is rushing through parliament absurd legislation to proscribe Palestine Action, the real terrorism is being committed in Gaza. Palestine Action affirms that direct action is necessary in the face of Israel's ongoing crimes against humanity of genocide, apartheid and occupation, and to end British facilitation of those crimes.' Opening the debate in the Commons on Wednesday, security minister Dan Jarvis said proscription of the group would 'reaffirm the UK's zero tolerance approach to terrorism, regardless of its form or underlying ideology'. 'Proscription is rightly ideologically neutral. It judges an organisation on its actions and the actions it is willing to deploy in pursuit of its cause', he said, adding that proscription was 'one of the most powerful counter-terrorism tools available to government. Any decision to proscribe is taken with great care and following rigorous consideration.' Unveiling the intention to ban the group following the incident on June 23, Cooper said it was the latest in a 'long history of unacceptable criminal damage committed by Palestine Action'. The group, which intends to bring a legal challenge against the government, has staged a series of demonstrations in recent months, including spraying the London offices of Allianz Insurance with red paint over its alleged links to Elbit, and vandalising Donald Trump's Turnberry golf course in South Ayrshire. Palestine Action's website says it uses disruptive tactics to target 'corporate enablers of the Israeli military-industrial complex' and seeks to make it 'impossible for these companies to profit from the oppression of Palestinians'. Some 81 organisations have been proscribed under the 2000 Act, including Islamist groups such as Hamas and al-Qaeda, far-right groups such as National Action, and the Russian private military company the Wagner Group. The draft order laid on Monday also lists neo-Nazi group Maniacs Murder Cult and far-right nationalist group Russian Imperial Movement, including its paramilitary arm, Russian Imperial Legion, to be proscribed in the UK. Belonging to or expressing support for a proscribed organisation, along with a number of other actions, are criminal offences carrying a maximum sentence of 14 years in prison.
The Herald Scotland
2 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
Scotch whisky industry sailing through choppy waters
The Trump tariffs landed as distillers were dealing with an almighty hangover from a post-Covid boom. Demand for premium Scotch whisky cooled as economic conditions deteriorated in key markets such as China, the US and Latin America, leaving importers with surpluses of stock to work through. Geopolitical turbulence, with Russia continuing its assault on Ukraine, attacks on shipping in the Mediterranean, and conflict between Israel and Hamas in Gaza, has done nothing for consumers' thirst for the water of life either. The impact of these challenges has been writ large in recent results from major industry players. In June, Bruichladdich owner Remy Cointreau cited the volatile global economic and geopolitical backdrop as it scrapped a key long-term target, highlighting the effects of tariffs both in US and anti-dumping duties in China, a major market for the company's Cognac exports. That came shortly after Johnnie Walker Diageo warned in May that US tariffs may hit its profits by $150 million a year. Pernod Ricard, owner of Dumbarton-based Chivas Brothers, cited the fall-out from US tariffs in April as sales fell short of forecasts in the third quarter. Given this background, it was no surprise that Scotch Whisky Association (SWA) was blunt in its assessment when asked to comment on the trading outlook by The Herald Business HQ Monthly, with the industry body also highlighting the impact on distillers from the high cost of production. Read more: 'What we're seeing right now is a once-in-a-generation set of challenges facing the Scotch whisky industry,' a spokesperson for the SWA said. 'Businesses of all sizes, but particularly SMEs (small and medium-sized enterprises), are operating under considerable strain as input costs have risen, from increased raw material and energy prices to the rise in employment costs. Consumer spending is also being impacted, the impact of which is being felt across the supply chain and hospitality sector. 'On the international stage, the key markets relied upon by smaller and medium sized companies to establish their business – the UK, the EU, and the US – are all facing their own unique obstacles which have put up barriers to trade and access. The US is our most valuable market, and is vital for many companies as they establish their export portfolio. 'It's important that talks continue between governments on both sides to reduce the current 10% the tariff burden for Scotch in the US. In the EU, we are monitoring developments on the new UK-EU deal to understand how the Scotch whisky industry can benefit.' With the impact of tariffs imposed during the first Trump president still fresh in their minds – the 25% tariff on single malt is believed to have hit exports by £650 million - Scotch whisky distillers are reporting disruption in the US market. Some distillers are changing their approach to the US, which remains the sector's biggest market by value. The value of Scotch shipped to the US was measured at £971 million in 2024. (Image: GlenAllachie) Billy Walker of GlenAllachie is upbeat about the industry's prospects in Vietnam 'The immediate term impact has been confusion and uncertainty over the tariffs leading to our distributors being very cautious,' said Ian Palmer, founder and chairman of InchDairnie Distillery in Fife. 'In the long term, there will be price increases for the US consumer leading to a loss of volume and that will be more evident at the 'value' end of the market. 'The more premium end will be better placed to ride out the storm. Our brands, our Scottish rye whisky, RyeLaw, and our recently launched peated malt, KinGlassie, are both at the premium end. At present we are managing both our costs and our price point, as well as preparing to be flexible. 'Historically, the US has always been seen as solid and safe market. This has gone now, so we are looking to manage the risk by ensuring we have a good geographic spread for our brands.' The uncertainty which has arisen from the Trump tariffs was also highlighted Martin Murray, co-owner and founder of Thurso-based Dunnet Bay Distillers. 'It's a real challenge for us,' he said: 'We'd set out a plan for 2025 with market visits and investment, but that has been significantly impacted by the US tariffs. It feels like we're living week to week and that's not good for anyone in the supply chain. The possibility of [tariffs] rising to 25% would have a big impact on sales and investment in this market. As a result, we've changed our strategy to be investing in sales in Asia. Our sales in China are going well in a market that still has challenges post-Covid.' Commenting more generally on the outlook, Mr Murray added: 'Currently, it certainly feels very turbulent, but there is an underlying resilient demand. We're braced for a challenging period, whilst things come back into balance. At the moment it feels like it's perfect storm of economic headwinds, trade policy uncertainty and changing behaviours. 'The biggest threats are tariffs in the US, and the impact on increasing costs in hospitality in the UK. For us we see the opportunities as being the continued trend of premiumisation and emerging markets.' Scotch whisky veteran Billy Walker, owner of the GlenAllachie Distillery in Speyside, said he is working in partnership with its US importers to spread the cost of tariffs on both parties. Read more: Mr Walker, who before acquiring GlenAllachie had built up and sold the BenRiach Distillery Company and previously worked for Ballantine's, Inver House, and Burn Stewart, said: 'We're trying to mitigate [the tariff] by taking 50% of it on us. So from an importer's point of view, they are going to be confronted with a 5% [cost increase]. 'But on a general position, these tariffs are going to be more damaging than the previous ones, because the previous ones were only on single malt. These are on all Scotch whisky.' Asked if there was any hope of the US tariffs on UK goods being reduced, Mr Walker said the SWA, which represents the industry in government matters, was doing a 'terrific job with the appropriate political people in the UK to find a way to mitigate them, or to get them reduced or removed'. But he said: 'I don't think they are going to get them wholly removed… it would be really welcome if they disappeared completely, but I don't think that is likely in the short-term.' Despite the challenges on the immediate horizon across the Atlantic, distillers emphasised the importance of the US market to the industry's prospects in the long run. Richard Urquhart, sales director at Elgin-based Gordon & MacPhail, owner of the Benromach and The Cairn distilleries in the north of Scotland, said the importance of the US to the company and the wider industry 'hasn't changed despite the imposition of tariffs'. Mr Urquhart said: 'While these tariffs have undoubtedly introduced added complexity and cost pressures, we remain committed to the market and to our American consumers and we will continue to work closely with our in-market partners to minimise impact. 'In terms of strategy, we will continue to navigate the changing environment. It's not about pulling back, it's about adapting. We remain focused on delivering exceptional whisky experiences, regardless of the trading climate.' For some distillers, it is a case of as you were. William Dobbie, managing director of R&B Distillers, owner of Isle of Raasay Distillery, said that US tariffs 'present a bit of short-term but are manageable together with our import partners'. He told The Herald Business HQ Monthly: 'The tariff on UK goods is not as punitive as some other regions in the world, which is manageable for now. The US tariffs are not changing our strategy at all. In fact, we are investing in the US market and plan to have some boots on the ground there over the next 12 to 24 months. 'Our independent, private ownership means we can take a very long-term point of view and allow us to make decisions that will put the business in a strong place long after the challenging short-term market conditions we are experiencing. If we changed our business plans at every whim of the current US administration we would be changing them every week, which is not something we have a desire or need to do.' Read more: Away from the US, distillers' hopes of building sales in the burgeoning spirits market of India received a major boost recently. The UK-India trade deal, which followed years of negotiations between the two countries, halved tariffs on imports of whisky and gin to India from 150% to 75%. The tariffs will then be reduced to 40% by the 10th year of the agreement. 'The UK-India trade deal is genuinely transformational for the Scotch whisky industry,' said Mr Murray at Dunnet Bay Distillers. 'Reducing tariffs from 150% to 75% immediately, and to 40% by year ten, opens unprecedented opportunities in what's already the world's largest whisky market by volume. 'Industry experts estimate this could increase Scotch exports to India by £1 billion annually, while generating £3.4bn in additional tax revenue for the Indian government through increased sales. For new distilleries like Castletown Mill, this is particularly significant because the deal enables smaller and independent producers to access the Indian market for the first time. 'India's growing middle class of over 300 million people represents a massive opportunity for premium spirits with authentic heritage stories. We've just got to be patient as we start our distillation of whisky this year.' Other markets are emerging strongly for the industry. Mr Walker highlighted the potential of a range of markets in Asia for Scotch whisky, including South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore and Malaysia, and singled out Vietnam as one to watch. Describing Vietnamese people as 'hard-working, energetic, and entrepreneurial', Mr Walker said: 'There's money to be spent there. I can see Vietnam becoming a huge holiday area in the next few years because it has such a wonderful coastline with remarkably decent infrastructure. 'And they are knowledgeable, they are not novices when it comes to Scotch whisky.' Mr Palmer also highlighted the potential of Asia for the industry. He acknowledged Asia and South America are 'not immune' to the current economic and trade uncertainty, but forecast that 'Asian markets will probably come out of the mist sooner than other markets'. Mr Murray added: 'We're finding challenges in most markets at present. The recovery post pandemic has not materialised and we're still seeing consumer spending habits changing. There are signs of a recovery with orders coming in regularly from China.' While there has been a steady flow of new distillery openings in Scotland over the last couple of decades, the current conditions may lead potential developers to think twice about investing in new facilities for Scotch whisky production in the current climate. Mr Palmer believes there is currently 'plenty' of distilling capacity, 'so any new distillery will have to have a long-term funding plan in place and develop a product that brings something new to the marketplace'. He added: 'I don't think more of the same will work in the current economic environment.' Mr Murray was slightly more optimistic on this front, noting: 'I believe there is still scope for new distilleries to open. I believe the traditional route to market is going to be less important as direct digital marketing and sales give new distilleries access to a significant audience willing to pay for premium products. 'Emerging markets have the place to play in supporting new distilleries' sales in the long term.'
Sky News
2 hours ago
- Sky News
New front door to House of Lords cost £9.6m... but doesn't work
A former spending watchdog has been asked to investigate after a new front door was installed at the House of Lords that cost nearly £10m and does not work. A security officer had to be permanently stationed at the door to press a button to open it, which one peer calculated was costing £2,500 each week. It also emerged the cost of the work spiralled by nearly 60% from the original estimate of £6.1m. The Lord Speaker has now written to independent crossbencher Lord Morse, who led the National Audit Office for a decade, to investigate the £9.6m door debacle. In his letter, Lord McFall of Alcluith, who chairs the House of Lords Commission that oversees the running of the site, said: "The commission identified that it was unclear how many issues were due to manufacturing and installation failures and how many were due to issues with the initial identification of requirements and subsequent need for alterations. "Additional information will be needed to understand the failures, including information on costs - both how the initial project figure of £6.1m was arrived at and the increase to the current total of £9.6m, and any unanticipated additional costs such as increased staffing to manage and operate the entrance. "It will be important to assess the quality of the decision-making in establishing the project and the ways in which the evidence provided for the specifications of the new entrance were tested to ensure they took account of user requirements." He added: "The problems that have arisen around delivery of the new entrance pose larger questions about effective programme delivery, including capability within parliamentary departments." Speaking at Westminster, senior deputy speaker Lord Gardiner of Kimble, who also sits on the commission, said: "It is unacceptable that the Peers' Entrance does not operate as it should. The commission has directed urgent work to resolve this." He added: "The cost to remedy defects will not be borne by the House and will be met by Parliament's contractors." Former Tory minister Lord Robathan said: "I do not hold the senior deputy speaker responsible for this scandal, but it is a scandalous waste of public money." Demanding to know who was responsible "by name", he said: "It is now nearly £10m for a door that does not work. Somebody accountable should be identified and should perhaps resign for this terrible waste of public money." Tory peer Lord Hayward said: "The senior deputy speaker told us the total cost, but the staff manning that door, calculated on the written answer he provided to me, are costing £2,500 per week. That cost has to be borne by someone." In response, Lord Gardiner said: "On the issue of the number of people involved in the manual use of the door while it is being repaired and made usable, I am assured that they are within the existing complement of members of staff."
