Nuclear waste safety disputed

Press, 5 August 1981, Page 2

Nuclear waste safety disputed

PA ' . Wellington The comment that Japanese nuclear dumping in the Pacific was so safe that waste could be dumped in Tokyo Bdy was totally unfounded, said the president of thfe New Zealand University Students’ Association. Mr Deryck Shaw, on Monday. He was replying to a statement by the Japanese DirectorGeneral of Science, and Technology. Mr Ichiro Nakagawa. Mr Shaw said that a scientific report made by Mr Jackson Davis ; chairman of the fhiman Laboratories and the Long Marine Laboratories. University of California, proved that Mr Nakagawa’s assertions were "totally incorrect." .

the report, prepared for the Northern Mariana Commonwealth Legislative in May. 1981. points out that the Science and Technology Agency of Japan has made seven serious scientific errors and omissions in its dumping proposal. The Davis report- has never been refuted by tile Japanese Government.

. “This report shows that the dumping; proposal would be in violation of both the letter and intent of the London dumping convention of 1972." said Mr Shaw. “It proves that both human and marine life in the Pacific could be endangered." , Labour's Shadow Minister of Foreign Affairs,' Mr Lange, said that a Labour Government would support other Pacific nations in not allowing the dumping of nuclear wastes in the Pacific. “This is, in keeping .with the party's nuclear-free Pacific policy,"'.said Mr Lange. Plans for Japan to drop about 100,000 drums of nuclear waste annually over the. next 20 years were “abhorrent,” Mr Lange Said.

“They are against the interests of Pacific people, the marine life of the area, and the potential use of natural resources in the proposed dumping grounds, and beyond." he said. “The Japanese Minister of State for Science and Technology can embrace nuclear waste' drums in his own country, but as far as Pacific nations are concerned this is almost the kiss of death. “With an increased Japanese nuclear power programme forecasted, the likelihood of using the Pacific as a convenient dumping ground for waste must be met with vigorous and united opposition, including that of the Government of New Zealand." Mr Lange said. The proposed dumping area lay within a big fishing area and as such was contrary to the 1972 London convention.

"There are other main worries of waste spreading through spillage, or the concentration of radiation in the area of dumping that would ruin that'area for habitation — by man. marine life, and vegetation — or for the exploration of this area for other resources.

"Labour opposes nuclear activity in the Pacific. Governments which produce nuclear waste have a. responsibility towards the safe ' use and disposal of nuclear fuels. The flippant remark by Mr Nakagawa that it is safe to dump nuclear waste in ' Tokyo Bay is not in keeping | with that responsibility, and all nations must oppose the ; dumping of nuclear waste in '' another's ' backyard," Mr i Lange said.