Radioactive Waste Management
Details
Thank you for your request received on 25 October 2021 for information related to the Allerdale Working Group. I have treated your request under the Environmental Information Regulations 2004 (the EIRs) and confirm that we hold information related to your request. Please see our responses below.
Confirmation of the stage(s) at which consent will be sought and what will halt the progress if it is shown that the community is not providing consent?
The governments policy on implementing geological disposal by working with communities was developed following several years of consultation and sets out a process that allows for engagement without early commitment on the part of communities and requires informed consent prior to decisions on site selection. All of the requirements are set out in Chapter 6 of the policy at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/implementing-geological-disposal-working-with-communities-long-term-management-of-higher-activity-radioactive-waste.
The process starts with discussions, fact-finding and engagement through a Working Group that can look to establish a Community Partnership to take the process forward with RWM, relevant Principal Local Authorities and community members working together. A Community Partnership can only be formed if at least one elected relevant Principal Local Authority agrees to participate. At any point prior to a Test of Public Support the elected relevant Principal Local Authorities can withdraw the community and halt the process. Once the necessary work has been undertaken to investigate the area and propose a potential site then the final Potential Host Community can be confirmed around that site. It is this community that will take a final decision on whether or not it consents to host a facility through a Test of Public Support. The elected relevant Principal Local Authorities on a Community Partnership will take the decision on when to hold a Test of Public Support but this would only be taken after extensive community engagement when the community has had time to ask questions, raise any concerns and learn about a GDF.
The Government policy is clear that if the result of the Test of Public Support is not positive, RWM will not be able to seek regulatory approval and development consent for a GDF and the siting process will cease in that community.
How do you plan to ensure consent received is informed and representative?
Community Partnerships could be working collaboratively to address issues, questions and concerns over a period of many years as technical work is carried out in parallel to provide more information, alongside the development of local community visions for the long-term future. As the Government policy that establishes the GDF siting process makes clear, the Test of Public Support would only be taken after extensive community engagement when the community has had time to ask questions, raise any concerns and learn about a GDF. It will be for Community Partnerships to decide how they wish to approach delivery of the Test of Public Support in their area, with the elected relevant Principal Local Authorities deciding the timing. The Government policy is also clear on the importance of this being carried out in a way that is fair and robust. It refers to three example mechanisms that could currently be used a local referendum, a formal consultation or statistically representative polling but also recognises that new methods to test public opinion may emerge in the future and Community Partnerships may wish to consider a different approach. More deliberative approaches that allow for more in-depth examination of issues by the public are being developed all the time and these may offer interesting opportunities for community decision making in future.
Please supply a summary of the age, gender and (if available) socioeconomic data for respondents to the survey carried out in April 2021 and how they represent the make-up of the consultation area as a whole.
The age and gender profile of the Allerdale sample is provided below. Quotas and weights were used to ensure the sample was representative of the known census profile of adult residents of Allerdale. The socio-economic group was not captured in the survey.
| Weighted proportion of sample | Unweighted base | Weighted base | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Total | 100% | 401 | 401 |
| Male | 49% | 188 | 196 |
| Female | 51% | 211 | 203 |
| Gender not provided | <1% | 2 | 2 |
Related ArticlesCommentsWrite a CommentMinisterial Departmental News
News CalendarRecent CommentsFollow Us on TwitterTweets by @gov_wire |