Leaving Euratom !!

[EDDIE51]

With the recent headlines little if any coverage has been given to Mrs May's determination to leave Euratom as well as leaving the EU !
I suspect very few realise the consequences of such a decision.
http://bruegel.org/2017/02/brexit-goes-nuclear-the-consequences-of-leaving-euratom/
Put simply Euratom controls the entire European stocks of and access to Nuclear fuel!
Once out of Euratom , Euratom is a separate entity to the EU and we have been in Euratom since 1959, we no longer have access to fuel for our newly commissioned ,French / Chinese built, nuclear power plants!
Your views?

[KARL]

Certainly interesting, maybe excellent. This is in tune with other aims, such as leaving the 1964 (or so) agreement on fisheries, a steady march into the margins and away from previous international agreements in order to achieve a new reality, supposedly to the UK's advantage (we shall see). This can be expected to lead to the UK being separate from the rest of Europe - it is hoped joining up the rest of the world (under its leadership ?) in a new club where the UK does better than others in Europe. Time will tell.

[douglas9401]

I for one have every faith in that capable and well organised machine that is the Tory government and their quaint bag carriers from Ulster.

The supply of nuclear fuel and disposal of waste couldn't be in safer, more reliable hands and see no reason whatsoever to worry.

About anything.

Ever.

[Zacs-Master]

What! You mean there are further complications?! Who would have thought......well, me for one.

They also control distribution of isotopes for medical research within the EU via the ESA. Just so we're aware of all the facts.

One has to be careful tho, Eddie as your source believes that scientific education will be severely damaged by the UK leaving the EU, so they have a bit of an axe to grind.

[EDDIE51]

Ok point taken. here is another link, there are dozens more
https://politicsmeanspolitics.com/brexit-and-euratom-impact-on-cancer-treatment-nuclear-power-plants-and-climate-change-e877d15560c1

[EDDIE51]

This bit from my second link explains the problems for radiotherapy in cancer treatment. >>
The medical radioisotopes Tc-99m and Mo-99 decay very quickly, which makes storage and transport time-critical (Tc-99m has a half-life of 6h, Mo-99 has a half-life is 66h). To be imported, Mo-99 is supplied by specialised radiopharmaceutical companies in the form of Tc-99m generators. These generators contain Mo-99 and produce Tc-99m as the Mo-99 decays. The life-time of the generators is a week. It is very important that the withdrawal from Euratom must not introduce delays in the shipment of these medical supplies. With a very short life-time, this essential material -used to diagnose cancer- might not arrive in a viable state, which could lead to delays in cancer treatment and putting patients at risk. Leaving Euratom would affect access to these radioisotope supplies and would need to form part of the Brexit negotiations.
Comments?

[jno]

well, there are lots of EU institutions that Britain will have to leave.

Still, no rush, Hinkley Point is a year behind schedule and £1.5bn over budget; just tell the Chinese and French to slow it down a bit more while the government scratches its head.

[Jackdaw33]

Is this the last desperate throw of the dice from Project Fear?

[naomi24]

Eddie, unless I'm very much mistaken your second link comes from the same source as your first.

[Kromovaracun]

//Is this the last desperate throw of the dice from Project Fear?//

No, people have been asking questions about Euratom and what leaving it would mean for ages, but everyone just ignores it and pretends the issue isn't there.

[Old_Geezer]

Hardly a complication. Simply a voluntary decision, if it even happens. We've had Windscale since 1956 so we'd be perfectly capable of sorting out an alternative within two years. I'm certain those making the decisions will have the information available on what is worth voluntarily changing and what not without anyone needing to doomsay about regaining our rightful control over our own nation. A little less, "Woe woe and thrice woe", (or should that be whoa whoa and thrice whoa ?) would be appropriate.

[Old_Geezer]

http://news.sky.com/story/key-points-whats-in-the-queens-speech-10922130

Nuclear Safeguards Bill.

Although granted it would be less fuss to negotiate agreement to keep the present arrangement, I can see the free movement of labour from the community would be a sticking point. Not to mention other ties to European institutions. Another example of impostitions in the paperwork to further EU aims even when it's not meant to be an EU entity.

[EDDIE51]

naomi, click on the two links they are not from the same source though they give similar warnings!

[naomi24]

Eddie, I clicked on the links. That’s how I saw the Bruegel logo on both.

[EDDIE51]

OG exactly, we were in Euratom years before we were in the EU. There is nothing to stop us staying in Euratom while leaving the EU. There are countries in Euratom that have never been in the EU and never will Switzerland for example.
Why do we need to enact new legislation when the existing legislation has worked perfectly well for decades ?

[EDDIE51]

There are dozens of links, one of the most comprehensive is from the Financial Times. I tried that one but you need to be a subscriber to view the entire piece.
Here is one from the Daily Telegraph
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/07/04/leaving-euratom-interests-even-necessary/

[Togo]

So lets get this straight, does it now mean that the EU fanatics pushing for a single EU wide armed forces strategy cannot now purloin our independent nuclear deterrent?

[ToraToraTora]

don't get your alans in a brahms Eddie, who do you think reprocesses a large proportion of the worlds nuclear fuel?

[New Judge]

It might be because of this (from the EU's own propaganda):

"The peaceful use of nuclear energy within the EU is governed by the 1957 Euratom Treaty, which established the European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom). While Euratom is a separate legal entity from the EU, it is governed by the EU's institutions."

Note the final sentence. Most people who voted to leave did so because (among many other things) they did not want to be governed by the EU or any of its "institutions". Since the EU has seemingly taken control of Euratom the UK will have to find other ways to deal with the supply and disposal of atomic material. Which I'm sure it will.

[jim360]

I suppose it's fair to argue that leaving Euratom is consistent. Still, I think you'd be hard-pressed to find many people who thought about this aspect of their vote last June.

[New Judge]

I certainly didn't but I'm glad somebody did.