Keir Starmer urged to do just one thing every day to fix the Nuked Blood scandal
Keir Starmer was already gacing a £5bn lawsuit and police investigation over a cover-up of human experiments on British troops.
Now a video of Labour's broken promises to survivors has gone viral, with 2 million people seeing proof of Cabinet ministers demanding compensation schemes they've failed to come up with in office.
And after 327 days of Downing Street ignoring requests to resolve what has become known as the Nuked Blood scandal, campaigners have vowed to repost the clips every day until they get a sit-down with the PM.
Starmer risks further humiliation in the months to come, with publication of an estimated 750,000 classified documents packed with juicy details of what really happened to 40,000 troops ordered to take part in nuclear weapons trials over more than a decade.
Alan Owen, founder of campaign group LABRATS, said: "Keir was the first party leader to sit down with members of the nuclear community and we believed him when he said 'your campaign is our campaign'. But after almost a year in government we are no nearer the truth or justice. Veterans are dying every week, and families are suffering chronic illness and psychological harm.
"We can start to fix that if we can show him our evidence of an official cover-up of biological experiments with radiation. It is fairer to the taxpayer to resolve it now, rather than wait for a judge's order. All we want is for him to look us in the eye and hear what we have to tell him."
The Ministry of Defence has denied for seven decades that troops were deliberately put in harm's way during the Cold War race to create nuclear weapons. But in 2022 the Mirror uncovered a memo detailing the blood tests of Group Captain Terry Gledhill, conducted before, during and after he led a squadron of planes through the mushroom clouds to gather samples.
It led to more than 30 separate orders for blood tests, covering thousands of men in all three armed forces, plus Commonwealth troops and indigenous people, between 1952 and 1967. Most were locked on a top secret database, codenamed Merlin, at the Atomic Weapons Establishment, which is about to be declassified and published following cross-party pressure from parliament and the Mirror. A partial release has already revealed hundreds of named servicemen called up for testing, confirmation that thousands were involved, and analysis of the results by weapons scientists.
Yet veterans who remember giving blood and urine specimens have found their medical records are missing, denying them accurate diagnosis for the high rates of cancers and blood disorders they report, as well as blocking war pensions and compensation.
In Opposition, Labour bigwigs who now hold influential government roles said "it shames us as a country" that nuclear veterans did not have justice, and demanded financial compensation from the Tories.
Deputy Leader Angela Rayner sent campaigners a video she had scripted herself, calling for the Tories to "set up an appropriate financial compensation programme for veterans and their descendants". Defence Secretary John Healey told the Labour Party Conference that the lack of a scheme "shames us, it shames us as a country". And Armed Forces Minister Luke Pollard told the Mirror's News Agenda podcast that it was "really dumb" for the Tories not to have paid out already.
Peter Stefanovic, lawyer and CEO of the Campaign for Social Justice, edited the clips together and has been sharing them on social media, gathering more than 2m views in just a few weeks.
He said: "They all backed compensation for our nuclear test veterans while in Opposition, and Keir Starmer himself told them 'the country owes you a huge debt of honour. Your campaign is our campaign'. I will repost my film every single day until the PM agrees to meet with them to discuss how his government will honour the commitment his party made to these national heroes."
LABRATS asked the PM for a meeting within days of his taking office, but has had no response for 327 days. The Mirror has also asked Mr Healey for a meeting, but none has been arranged. The Met Police are assessing a 500-page dossier of evidence about allegations of criminal misconduct in public office, while lawyers are preparing to issue a legal claim for the missing medical records that is predicted to lead to a 10-figure payout.
Last month, the MoD admitted the monitoring "may have been" conducted without proper medical supervision.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Spectator
13 minutes ago
- Spectator
Under CTRL, the Epping migrant protests & why is ‘romantasy' so popular?
First: the new era of censorship A year ago, John Power notes, the UK was consumed by race riots precipitated by online rumours about the perpetrator of the Southport atrocity. This summer, there have been protests, but 'something is different'. With the introduction of the Online Safety Act, 'the government is exerting far greater control over what can and can't be viewed online'. While the act 'promises to protect minors from harmful material', he argues that it is 'the most sweeping attempt by any liberal democracy to bring the online world under the control of the state'. Implemented and defended by the current Labour government, it is actually the result of legislation passed by the Conservatives in 2023 – which Labour did not support at the time, arguing it didn't go far enough. So how much of a danger is the Act to free speech in Britain? John joined the podcast to discuss further alongside former Conservative minister Steve Baker, MP from 2010-24, and who was one of the biggest critics of the bill within the Conservative Party at the time. Next: should we be worried about protests against migrants? This week, outside a hotel in Epping, groups amassed to protest against the migrants housed there, with counter-protestors appearing in turn. Tommy Robinson might not have appeared in the end, but the Spectator's Max Jeffery did, concluding that the protests were ultimately 'anticlimactic'. Nevertheless, the protests have sparked debate about the motivations of those speaking out against the migrants – are there legitimate concerns voiced by locals, or are the protests being manipulated by figures on the political fringes? And what do the protests tell us about community tensions in the UK? Max joined the podcast to discuss alongside the editor of Spiked Tom Slater. And finally: why are 'romantasy' novels so popular? Lara Brown writes in the magazine this week about the phenomenon of the genre 'romantasy', which mixes romance with fantasy. While 'chick-lit' is nothing new, Lara argues that this is 'literature taken to its lowest form', emblematic of the terminally online young people who consume it. Nevertheless, it is incredibly popular and is credited by publishers as boosting the British fiction industry to over £1 billion. To unpack the genre's popularity, Lara joined the podcast, alongside Sarah Maxwell, the founder of London's first romance-only bookshop Saucy Books, based in Notting Hill. Hosted by William Moore and Lara Prendergast. Produced by Patrick Gibbons and Megan McElroy.
The National
22 minutes ago
- The National
John Curtice gives verdict on Corbyn-Sultana party threat to Keir Starmer
The leading pollster said that it was 'of course' possible that the Prime Minister and others could be dethroned at the next General Election, if the Corbyn-Sultana project got off the ground. A senior Labour source told the New Statesman that it was 'not inconceivable' that Starmer, Health Secretary Wes Streeting and Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood could all be booted out by their constituents in 2029. At the last election, Starmer's vote almost halved, Streeting's majority was reduced to just 528 votes while Mahmood's vote fell by 53%, all facing pro-Palestine independent challengers. Asked whether the trio were at risk, Curtice, of Strathclyde University, told The National: 'Of course it's not inconceivable, just look at the size of their majorities and look at how far Labour's vote's fallen.' He added that his assessment of the data showed it 'wasn't clear that Labour were making much of a recovery' in constituencies with large numbers of Muslim voters. Pro-Palestine independents took four seats at the last election, most notably Labour bigwig Jonathan Ashworth's defeat at the hands of Shockat Adam in Leicester South. But Curtice said that the Corbyn-Sultana party could face challenges along the way, highlighting what he identified as mistakes during Corbyn's time as Labour leader. READ MORE: SNP to press ahead with Palestine recognition vote as Labour 'bargaining' with Israel He said: 'Corbyn clearly has the ability to enthuse a section of the electorate. But does he have the ability to provide leadership?' He pointed to Corbyn's stance on Brexit in the run-up to the 2019 vote, when he said he would grant a second referendum but backed neither Leave nor Remain. 'On an issue that was clearly polarising the electorate and when Boris Johnson was clearly milking the votes on one side, that was just politically utterly the wrong strategy,' said Curtice. 'Corbyn is a sincere politician with a number of very clear beliefs which he can communicate well, he's got that art and he's got that art much more than Starmer does. But leadership is also about being able to take folk who are not your natural supporters with you.' He also expressed doubt about the party's organisational capacity, noting their 'original announcement they couldn't manage to coordinate on'. Sultana appeared to have surprised Corbyn by announcing the launch of the new party, which he only confirmed the day after. Curtice added: 'The crucial question is now: will the fight next year's local and devolved elections? Are they going to be up and ready? At the moment, they're engaging on a consultation about a name.' He said that 'time was of the essence' if the party wanted to fight next year's devolved and local elections, which include London – a city which should be 'prime territory for Corbyn'. Corbyn said: 'Up and down the country, there is huge appetite for the policies that are needed to fix society in 2025: public ownership, wealth redistribution, housing justice, and a foreign policy based on peace and human rights.' "For too long, people have been denied a real political choice. Not anymore. 600,000 people have already signed up to build a real alternative to inequality, poverty and war. This is just the beginning. We are an unstoppable movement for equality, democracy and peace — and we are never, ever going away.'
The National
23 minutes ago
- The National
Keir Starmer could do case for Palestinian state more harm than good
Among those present at the dinner was Chief Rabbi Ephraim Mirvis who – according to The Jewish Chronicle – earlier that same month had criticised Starmer's decision to suspend some arms exports to Israel as one which 'beggars belief'. Fast forward then to this week and the extraordinary public appeal on Monday by the presidents of five leading Israeli universities to prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu. In a joint letter and citing a moral imperative 'shaped by the trauma of the Holocaust,' the signatories to the letter called on Netanyahu to 'do all we can to prevent cruel, indiscriminate harm to non-combatant men, women, and children' in Gaza. READ MORE: Scottish Labour councillor suspended for 'bullying' member of the public Maybe it's just me, but there seems to be something of a contradiction here. For on the one hand we have the Chief Rabbi decrying Starmer's decision to suspend some arms shipments to Israel, barely weeks before a Holocaust education event. Then this week we have senior Israeli academics referencing the lessons of the Holocaust in an effort to urge Netanyahu to uphold Israel's ethical and legal responsibilities. Perhaps such a contradiction should be no real surprise, for when it comes to the global response to the horrors happening in Gaza, they have been pretty much 10 a penny over the past 21 months. Starmer himself this week is precisely a case in point. His announcement that the UK will recognise a Palestinian state in September while tacking on a set of conditions such as Israel agreeing to a ceasefire and committing to a two-state solution before then, is so typical of him as a politician. Mealy-mouthed, kowtowing and politically congenitally incapable of making a clear-cut decision, have always been Starmer's chief traits. Just look at the way for example he came scuttling up to Turnberry at US president Donald Trump's beckoning. I don't know about you but I'm hard pressed to remember such an unedifying spectacle of a leader being summoned by a foreign head of state in his own country. But back to that announcement about recognition of a Palestinian state, for another of Starmer's chief traits is his unerring capacity for serial U-turns, and who is to say that given the wording and conditions attached to the latest announcement we might well see another. Even watching him make that announcement, I couldn't rid myself of the nagging feeling that this was yet another piece of Starmer window dressing rather than an act that would make a substantive change on the ground in Gaza and the occupied West Bank. Just so I'm clear about this Mr Starmer – are you seriously suggesting that if Israel's onslaught in Gaza and seizing of territory in the occupied West Bank continue, then Britain will perhaps green light recognising a Palestinian state? But on the other hand, if Netanyahu and his cohorts suddenly declare a ceasefire, then recognition is off the table? The sheer arrogance of this– not to mention the stupidity – is mind-boggling. Such is the cynicism of such a strategy that it makes the 1916 Sykes-Picot Agreement – which initially placed Palestine under international control, before eventually, it was given to Britain to control – look like a benevolent gesture. Don't get me wrong here, for as I've written before in this newspaper, I would heartily welcome the day when a Palestinian state is recognised. As I also wrote in last Sunday's edition of The National, I'm firmly of the belief that there is just an inkling that the political ground is shifting on both sides of what the Israeli writer Amos Elon once described as an 'irresistible force colliding with an immovable body'. Or to put this another way, such is the magnitude of events in Gaza, there is no going back to the way things were for Israelis and Palestinians alike. (Image: Hatem Khaled, REUTERS) In that regard then, almost any help forthcoming in the case for recognising a Palestinian state is welcome. But the framing of Britain's 'conditional' approach in contrast to that of France's declaration could just as easily hinder rather than help. Try putting yourself in the position of how many Palestinians must view Starmer's equivocation. Writing in the Independent yesterday, Palestinian political analyst and writer, Ahmed Najar, who himself is originally from Gaza, hit the nail on the head. 'What kind of justice operates on those terms? This is not diplomacy. This is moral blackmail. It is Britain saying to Palestinians: your right to exist is not yours. It depends entirely on the behaviour of your occupier.' Najar is so right when he says that what Starmer is offering is 'complicity dressed as strategy.' Responding recently to French president Emmanuel Macron's insistence that recognising Palestine was a 'moral duty,' Israel's defence minister, Israel Katz, made quite clear what he thought of the move. 'They will recognise a Palestinian state on paper – and we will build the Jewish-Israeli state on the ground,' he said. 'The paper will be thrown in the trash can of history and the State of Israel will flourish and prosper,' Katz attested. If that is Israel's response to Macron's unequivocal recognition of Palestine, then God only knows how much Netanyahu's cabal must have been chuckling at Starmer's timid, maybe, maybe not, announcement. The Israeli leader did of course need to be seen hitting out at Starmer's decision. '(UK PM Keir) Starmer rewards Hamas's monstrous terrorism & punishes its victims,' Netanyahu said in a post on social media. But outraged as Netanyahu appeared to be, he knows that much could happen before September and Starmer could find himself in a corner of his own making were Israel to agree to a ceasefire within the deadline, only to subsequently resume 'hostilities' under some pretext. Starmer needs to wake up and realise that no country that subjugates millions of people who live in Gaza and the occupied West Bank can claim legitimacy as a democracy. He also needs to recognise that criticism of Israel does not by default make him or anyone else antisemitic. What we have seen this week is classic Starmer. In short, prevarication in the face of irrefutable facts, and because of it he could still yet do the Palestinian cause more harm than good.
