In support of the Nuclear Test Veterans and Family Community campaign for Justice.
GOVERNMENT STATEMENTS IN AUTUMN 2023 CONFIRM HISTORIC POLICY DECISIONS, MADE BEHIND CLOSED DOORS SINCE THE 1950’s, ARE STILL BEING ENFORCED TODAY TO DENY THE CLAIMS OF THE NUCLEAR TEST VETERAN AND FAMILY COMMUNITY.
This Newsletter is therefore sourced from historical 1950’s and onwards digital and hard copy archive documents and other information acquired since the mid-1980’s by individual combined services British, Australian and New Zealand nuclear test veterans and the family community (NTVFC); from the records of British, Australian and New Zealand nuclear veterans; in recent years also from the rapidly expanding archives of LABRATS www.labrats.international a community interest company; records also added by decades of international media reports, in particular by the UK newspaper DAILY MIRROR and by other stakeholders of the NTVFC campaign for justice which includes independent scientific experts, supportive cross-party politicians and lawyers who support a just and honourable settlement of claims.
The newsletter adds further reference to the 28 November 2023 Nuclear Test Veteran / Medical Records debate initiated by supportive cross-party Members of Parliament and responded to by Dr Andrew Murrison, Defence Minster.
Subject: Historical Archive Records Show a Premeditated Policy of Perversion of the Truth has evolved to Deny any Accountability and Responsibility for the Legacy of Inherited Ill Health, Premature Deaths and Genetic Damage suffered by the Nuclear Test Veterans, their Children and future Descendants.
Part One : THE INHERITED POLITICAL PROBLEM OF DENIAL OF ACCOUNTABILITY AND RESPONSIBILITY IS STILL NOT BEING FULLY AND OPENLY ADDRESSED.
Statements in the Autumn OF 2023 by Dr Andrew Murrison MP, Minister for Defence People and Families in the House of Commons and by Baroness Goldie, Secretary of State for Defence, in the House of Lords confirm the Government is still in denial. The Nuclear Test Veteran / Medical Records debate of 28 November concerning the unlawful withholding, redaction etc of nuclear test veteran medical records of blood tests etc confirms serious questions of lack of democratic openness and transparency still exists with regard to the hazards of radiation.
The above response by Minister Murrison has been challenged by a CHANV open letter of 2 December 2023 written in support of the NTVFC. Baroness Goldie’s statement on nuclear veteran policy has also been challenged by David Whyte a V-Club Associate of LABRATS and CHANV. No credible response to statements of both senior politicians in Autumn 2023 is expected to be made. The Murrison / Goldie statements contain little credible substance and undoubtedly are the result of misguided advice given to them by senior officials of the Ministry of Defence. Only a continuation of biased information or silence is anticipated.
Legal action, without legal aid entitled to tax payers, is now in progress to obtain the medical records.
On 14 December 2023 an update of legal action being undertaken by McCue, Jury and Partners LLP, on behalf of the NTVFC, has updated claimants of progress that has been made to gain release of the medical records unlawfully being withheld or redacted etc. Past attempts to gain access to them since the 1980’s indicate the medical records are held by various known MoD contractual partners or have been deposited (with no access allowed) in the new – Nucleus - depository in the far northern tip of Scotland’s mainland.
The details of progress, at the present moment, is not intended by McCue Jury & Partners LLP to be disclosed to or used by anyone other than intended recipient(s) NTVFC claimants or stakeholders. However, the legal company indicate in their update the above may change in light of developments. They are of course looking to claimants to provide information as happened with the Atomic Veterans Group Litigation of 2005 to 2014.
Historically, the denial of legal aid is part of an inherited discriminatory policy of exclusion of nuclear test veteran and families from gaining any duty of care. This is part of deliberate policy which evolved from decisions made ‘behind closed doors in confidence‘ at senior cabinet level from 1952 to today. Policy decisions that have never, ever been fully and openly debated in the United Kingdom Parliament.
The view of many is that it’s a disgrace that tax payers are being denied legal aid whilst anyone else, it seems illegal migrants, convicted rapists and terrorist suspects etc, are given entitlement to legal aid. Added to which, nuclear test veterans are not only taxpayers being discriminated against. They are also individuals who served the nation during the Cold War to ensure democratic values placed this nation above such values of discrimination.
To find out more of how funds can be donated to assist the LABRATS / DAILY MIRROR initiated legal campaign please see references at the end of this newsletter.
THE CRUCIAL AND PIVOTAL SEVEN YEAR PERIOD OF BI-LATERAL TALKS.
History archives acquired by nuclear veterans show a seven year period of events 20/11/1985 to 10/12/1993 are crucial and pivotal to the discrimination used against the NTVFC. During the years 1985 to 1993 a series of 40 bi-lateral talks, at cabinet level held ‘in confidence‘ behind closed doors, took place between the UK Government and Australian Federal Government.
These talks agreed policy decisions whereby both democratic nations, the UK and Australia - by reciprocal Treaty obligation, signed at talk series no.40 on 10 December 1993 - agreed to work together by exchanging information ‘to deny any compensation’ being paid to the nuclear test veterans and family community.
As a direct result, Government policy towards the NTVFC in 2024 still remains subject to the following cold war premeditated mantra, that is:
‘Ignore the nuclear test veterans’ radiation inherited ill health and their premature deaths and also ignore the known genetic damage passed to their children;
Overlook the science that inhaled or inhaled fall out dosages of radiation is the prime causation of legacy ill heath etc
LIE to them with regard to whereabouts of medical records and radiation dosages
Expose them deliberately to alpha, beta and gamma radiation without adequate PPE for experimental purposes and finally:
Abandon them left to die without access to diagnostic cytogenetic blood tests which could allow early remedial treatment(s).
Part Two : THE CABINET-IN-CONFIDENCE DOCUMENT THAT POLITICALLY UNDERPINS THE INHERITED POLICY OF DENIAL.
Past historic records can always be a teacher – or a warning of what comes next. The following document is both.
Archive Document/ Cabinet – In - Confidence Augmented Expenditure Review Committee / Canberra, 31 July 1986 Decision No. 8342 (AER ) / Submission No . 4158 – Handling of Recommendations of Royal Commission on British Nuclear Tests in Australia: Overview.
This Australian government response to the recommendations of the 1985 Royal Commission Report of some 600 pages was presented to the Federal Canberra Government on 20 November 1985 and contained seven recommendations.
The Canberra Government reaction to the recommendations is stated in this 31 July 1986 to have been made on the basis of ‘a non-confrontational approach in all dealings with the UK Government , and an amical and productive working relationship.’ This working relationship over the next seven years effectively led, to and ensured, the political exclusion of nuclear veterans who took part in the weapon tests, their widows and families, from any recommended compensation with the signing of the bi-lateral Treaty between UK and Australia on 10 December 1993.
How did this 1986 treaty series initiation by the 1985 Royal Commission come into the hands of the NTVFC ?
This document was obtained in 2006 by Alan Batchelor, Vice President of the Australian Nuclear Veterans Association (ANVA). Hard copy of the document was passed to UK based Combined Veterans’ Forum International (CVFI) of which Mr Batchelor was an associate. That is, 13 years after the 1993 Treaty was enshrined into law. The former Australian Royal Engineer officer Major Batchelor MBE acquired the above document when he was invited to take part in Dosimetry Forums of the 2006 epidemiological study into cancer and mortality being undertaken at the time on behalf of the Australian Government by Adelaide University.
Historical notes of interest:
A. The Adelaide University 2006 study was a remake (same biased protocols , same biased methodology) of the 1980’s and 90’s UK National Radiological Protection Board epidemiological studies which were found very quickly, by many reputable independent - i.e. non-UK government controlled contractual sources - to be significantly biased and flawed since these studies were based only on death certificates and ignored all blood test and medical records. By 2004, the UK NRPB studies had been independently and expertly considered as being ‘perverted for political reasons‘.
B. By 2006 the ANVA, thanks to Alan Batchelor assisted by two Doctors eminent in radiological induced hazards, independent of government control, had found that radioactive fall out from UK atomic tests in Australian had covered the whole continent of Australia, not only limited to 100 miles from the bomb tests The hospital records for Maralinga Support Unit, based at RAAF Edinburgh Field for the whole period of test programme 1952 to 1967, were found to have all totally disappeared.
C. In 2006 the results of the Adelaide study were being fiercely challenged in Australia with senior political support, amongst others, from Senator Lyn Alison, leader of the Australian Democrat Party, who said the Australian Government should not be using easily biased epidemiology but should be blood testing nuclear test veterans using advanced diagnostic technology of cytogenetic analysis indicating chromosomal damage in the DNA of persons exposed to ionising radiation from nuclear bomb testing service. This process already began in 1999 in New Zealand and was receiving huge press notice in Australia in 2006.
The above historical notes of the 2006 Adelaide Epidemiology study which had forced a Senate Inquiry was a prime example of both UK/Australia working together in accord with the 1993 Treaty to deny compensation.
Mr Batchelor in 1957, as a Royal Australian Engineer Officer, had been a troop commander of Australian army engineers during Operation Antler – a series of 3 atomic bomb tests over a 6 months period at Maralinga – and at Dosimetry Forums held in 2006 this former Army Officer pointed out, due to his service of witnessing corrupted dosimetry at Operation Antler and as a graduate in physics, that the 2006 Adelaide University epidemiological study was being undertaken with “insufficient dosimetry information available“ to have any credibility.
From this point invitation to Alan Batchelor to attend the Dosimetry Forums was subsequently ended.
Historical note of interest:
D. Such was indeed the paranoia of 2006 that the Australian Government had passed into law an Epidemiological Act – which stated any person challenging the findings of epidemiological studies can face imprisonment. This was pressure exerted on any persons questioning the efficacy of the Adelaide University study of nuclear veterans health and mortality.
However, during his period of Adelaide University Consultative Forum, Alan Batchelor and his wife Marion who were residents of Canberra, had been allocated ‘special readers’ passes to the Australian National Archives. Of which has proved to be a great advantage for the nuclear test veteran and family community. This has since shed a bright light on the years of treachery from 1986 to the 10 December 1993 which resulted in the signing of the bilateral UK / Australian Treaty: for both nations to work together ‘to deny compensation’ .
The impact of this seven years of policy evolvement 1985 to 1993 is now regarded by many as a legacy of criminality. Particularly the denial of access to personal blood and urine medical records, all is seen as more the actions of autocratic states rather two democratic governments.
The policy decision to deny a duty of care, accountability and responsibility of the damaged lives of over 30,000 plus (i.e. 20,000 plus British and 10,000 plus Commonwealth mainly Australian and NZ and Fijian servicemen and an estimated 150,000 genetically damaged descendants) has been exposed as a result.
This is a policy decision involving many contractual UK and Australian partnerships to uphold a policy of non-accountability.
Part Three: WHAT DOES THE 31 JULY 1986 AUSTRALIAN CABINET -IN -CONFIDENCE REPORT REVEAL?
This 41 page report is an overview of handling the recommendations of the Royal Commission report following its 1985 visit to London. Gareth Evans QC, Minister for Resources and Energy for the Australian Federal Government in Canberra wrote the report. Which perhaps explains the outcome since Australia had nuclear resource interests since 1952. Australia provided the uranium and test sites for the UK bomb tests and also had interest in nuclear use for energy production.
The Royal Commission report of over 600 pages into the British Nuclear Tests in Australia were presented on 20 November 1985 and tabled in the Canberra Parliament, without any substantive comment at that stage, on 5 December 1985.
This Commission report was by Australia lawyers who had come to UK in the mid - 1970’s due, amongst other complaints, that despite the fact the UK lied in 1967 that the clean-up Operation Brumby of Maralinga had been an entire success, the clean-up had in fact ignored deadly plutonium and other lethal radiation that had been callously and most cost saving effectively left behind. Operation Brumby in 1967 was in fact an unmitigated disaster especially for the veterans who took part.
Historical note of interest:
E. It must be noted that by 1986 several clean-ups of Maralinga had already taken place. The rushed and botched Operation Brumby of 1967 had prematurely cost the lives of the 36 man team of Royal Air Force veterans given the deadly task without any protective clothing. When a reunion of the airmen involved was arranged in 2010 only 7 of the 35 young airmen were still alive; the others had all died of cancer. The officer in charge of the Brumby decontamination Flt Lt Sam McGee, died the following year. The attrition rate had been very swift for many of these men.
A biased report (The Pearce Report) on Brumby, written by a UK government appointed nuclear scientist Noah Pearce, had whitewashed this clean-up being conclusively cleared of all contamination when in fact it had proved to be the direct opposite.
This clean up was followed by others after the discovery of plutonium left behind by whistle blower RAAF Leading Aircraftman Avon Hudson. See below also below references to the Australian Technical Assessment Group (TAG) initiated by the 1986 Cabinet – In- Confidence Review Committee report following the Recommendations of the Royal Commission.
Talks on Report of Royal Commission into British Nuclear Tests in Australia are listed in Attachment B-Annexure A of a media statement in the Cabinet – In – Confidence 31 July 1986 states:
THE FIRST ROUND OF TALKS WITH THE UK ON THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF ROYAL COMMISSION REPORT BEGAN WITH THE UK IN LONDON ON 22 JANUARY 1986 BETWEEN AUSTRALIAN SENATOR GARETH EVANS QC AND THE UK’s FOREIGN SECRETARY GEOFFREY HOWE, LADY YOUNG AND DEFENCE PROCUREMENT MINISTER NORMAN LAMONT AT WHICH TWO MAJOR PROCEDURAL ISSUES IN PRINCIPLE WERE AGREED.
The talks had indeed got off to an ‘amicable and productive start’ between Australian and UK politicians in January 1986, but by 31 July 1986 what had in fact been agreed to be CHANGED by working together to deny compensation as mention in Rec 1. and 7. and in the remainder of recommendations is shown below.
The seven recommendations from the 1985 Royal Australian Commission Report and changes are as follows:
Rec 1: extension of compensation benefits
The shifting of the onus of proof from the claimant to the Commonwealth should be extended so as to include not only members of the armed forces who are present and covered by the Commonwealth Employees Act 1971 , but also civilians who were at the test sites at the relevant time , and Aborigines and other civilians may gave been exposed to the black mist. [i.e. bomb fall-out]
WHAT WAS CHANGED? – The onus of proof was reversed back to the claimant. MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES WERE EXCLUDED. The establishment of an administrative scheme applying the provisions of the Compensation Act, to Aboriginal and white civilian workers who wish to claim is accepted. (Minister for Social Security, Submission No.4161)
Rec 2 : compilation of National Register
To assist the Commissioner for Employees’ Compensation in performance of the additional duties recommended in Rec 1, a national register of nuclear veterans, Aborigines and other persons who may have been exposed to Black Mist or exposed to radiation at the tests should be compiled.
WHAT WAS CHANGED ? – The RECOMMENDATION for a national register is REJECTED by achievement of similar results by different means. (Minister for Resources and Energy, Submission No. 4159)
Rec 3, 5, 6 – in the Royal Commission Recommendations refer to Clean-up Options
WHAT WAS CHANGED ? All Decided by (Minister for Resources and Energy, Submission No. 4160)
Rec 3 : Clean-up recommendation
Action should be commenced immediately to effect the clean up of Maralinga and Emu to the satisfaction of the Australian Government so that they are fit for unrestricted habitation by the traditional Aboriginal owners as soon as practicable.
WHAT WAS CHANGED ?
[ * ] see what was changed below for Rec 3. And B. British Interests on Rec 7 . Compensation.
Rec 4 : establishing a Maralinga Commission
A Maralinga Commission, comprising representatives of the traditional owners, the UK, Australian and South Australian Governments should be established to determine the clean-up criteria, oversee the clean up and co-ordinate all future Range agreements.
WHAT WAS CHANGED ?
By Cabinet decision 7040 the establishment of a MARALINGA COMMISSION WAS REJECTED.
Rec 5 : Further Clean-up recommendation
Action should be taken immediately to ensure all areas of Monte Bello Islands where radiation levels are above the limits recommended for continuous exposure of members of the public are suitably signposted until safe for permanent occupation. Small pieces of debris should be collected to avoid being removed as souvenirs. The large structure of Trimouille Island that are relics of past programmes should remain for historical interest.
Rec 6 : Final Clean-up recommendation
All future clean-ups at Maralinga, Emu and the Monte Bello Islands should be borne by the UK government.
[ * ] WHAT WAS CHANGED for Clean – up Recs 3, 5 and 6 – and British Interests at Rec 7: Compensation.
On the basis of Australian Technical Assessment Group (TAG) interim report worked on since January 1986, already received at 31 July 1986, it recommends studies to evaluate the hazard and extent of clean-up should be extended for another 2 years, and that the United Kingdom should be asked to contribute 50% to costs.
See – The 2 year TAG Clean-up Studies – at Part Four below.
Rec 7 : Compensation
The Australian Government should make compensation to those persons and descendants of those persons who have traditional interests in the sites at the former Maralinga prohibited area for loss of use and enjoyment of their lands since the beginning, and as a result of the atomic test program. This should take the form of technology and services which the Aboriginal people regard as necessary for them to re-establish their relationship with their land ad rapidly as possible and with minimal hardship.
WHAT WAS CHANGED ?
COMPENSATION AND CLEAN–UP FORMED THE BASIS OF A RECIPROCAL TRADE OFF BETWEEN THE UNITED KINGDOM AND AUSTRALIA see b. British Interests below.
The decision of the Cabinet on compensation for Aboriginals was said to be helpful to consider the overall strategic framework as follows:
Aboriginal interests - compensation for loss of use and enjoyment of land after decontamination? Unrestricted habitation water supplies and needs may be accepted as a trade off for compensation .
British Interests – the Australian Cabinet-In-Confidence Decision 8342 of 31 July 1986 in full reads:
‘While the British Government will continue to minimise its obligation to clean up the sites, its willingness to pay in whole or part will depend on the mix of legal and moral argument, and on the extent of the clean-up insisted upon. The British have also stated their concern that if personal compensation awards are opened up, precedents will be set for their own nuclear veterans. There is a connection between the compensation and clean-up issues only in as far as restraint by the Australian Government on its compensation issue may assist the negotiating climate when it comes to seeking recovery of clean up costs.’
THIS DECISION ON COMPENSATION IS PIVOTAL TO THE 1993 TREATY. SEE F) BELOW ....
Historic Note of Interest:
F . By time the 2 year TAG studies had ended with clean up works to commence 1988 to 89 and the whole series of talks brought to fruition the 10 December 1993 joint Treaty the ‘British Interests’ - at B. above - had established a reciprocal agreement whereby UK paid £20 million to Australia over 5 years for clean-up costs in exchange for both nations exchanging information to work together to deny compensation being paid to the any nuclear test veteran.
Part Four . THE TWO YEAR TAG CLEAN – UP STUDIES.
The Cabinet-In-Confidence report of 31 July 1986 identified 30 tasks considered should be developed. This was said to follow relevant ‘used by data‘ from the US Nevada nuclear tests sites which gave valuable insight for the Australian Government. The TAG interim assessment of tasks needed was assisted by a number of experts and organisations two of which included, Dr Hylton Smith a member of the UK National Radiological Protection Board ( NRPB ) [now known as the Health Security Agency] and Mr David Deverill a former head of department at the UK’s Atomic Weapons Research Establishment (AWRE) [now known as the AWE.]
That is, both UK appointee representatives for UK are from of organisations noted in historic archive records as having established policy that favours the government status quo rather than the true interests of science and any empathy towards to nuclear test veteran and family community concerns.
That is, they are employees or former employees of Ministry of Defence contractual partners.
The TAG report of their knowledge as of 31 July 1986 confirmed that ‘inhaled and contaminated dust can lodge temporarily in the airways of the lining of the lung and nose and throat or more permanently in the lung.’
The TAG report noted also the total ‘quantification of dust arising activity in desert areas (i.e. such as Maralinga during the botched bulldozer-driven clearance of top soil at Operation Brumby in 1967) gave rise to an elemental distribution of radioactivity sources for inhalation and ingestion into the body.‘ This source knowledge is needed ‘ the TAG report stated.
[This of course is a major causal link to ill health to persons living and working in nuclear weapon test locations whether in Nevada, Maralinga Australia, the Pacific Island atolls or indeed any other nuclear weapon test experimental location.]
The TAG report to the Australian cabinet continued: Some of the dust during suspension activity [of working conditions or by wind] ‘ the distribution and elemental radioactivity in each range of particular size needs to be quantified . Some of the dust lodged in lung will be solubilised by lung fluids and translocated to other organs of the body. The consequences of a fraction of the inhaled dust that lodges at least temporarily in the nasopharynx is of interest.’
The TAG reported one of the objectives of the 2 year study is a laboratory program ‘to determine how much of the fraction of dust , if ingested into the gut, after being cleared for the lungs can pass through the wall of the gut into the blood stream.’
Historic note of interest:
G . Archive records show the above causal link was already well known by 1986. But of course for ‘government eyes only‘ but not to be of any scientific help to the victims of exposure to ionising radiation. The TAG report does confirm however the need for those involved in the studies over the next two years to be working with maximum use of PPE. For the personnel assigned for the study the TAG report also drew attention to the hazard of radiation even able to gain access inside the body by way of a cut or wound to the skin .
The experimental nature of the UK nuclear weapon, to assist nuclear industry to provide adequate protection for nuclear energy and mining workers, [A 1956 Archive Document – DO 35/5493 251 Biological Investigations at Atomic Bomb Tests in Australia, a joint venture by UK and Australian government contractual partners , overseen by the UK’s AWRE.] also confirms why the AWRE scientists working alongside unprotected nuclear combined forces veterans wore full PPE including respirators whilst the servicemen were deliberately completely unprotected.
The above of course is an adequate description of the respirator needs to give protection from the inhalation or ingestion of alpha and beta fall-out particles of nuclear bomb testing.
Part Five: THE TAG 2 YEAR STUDIES WERE AGREED TO BE COMPLETED BY 1989. THIS TO BE FOLLOWED UP BY THE CLEAN UP AND THE SIGNING OF THE 1993 TREATY OF BOTH NATIONS WORKING TOGETHER TO DENY COMPENSATION TO NUCLEAR VETERANS.
The cost of the TAG two year field work at Monte Bello, Maralinga and Emu nuclear bomb test sites was estimated in the Australian Cabinet report of 31 July 1986 as being, in Australian Dollars, $100,000 per man/ years to work in such contaminated areas. The report stated, ‘The risks associated with the inhalation of wind generated dust needs continuous air sampling for radiative and toxic contaminants and inhalation from alpha particles of plutonium from Maralinga and all areas.’
The report continued: ‘The in- situ immobilisation of the major plutonium bearing pits appears to be an attractive option. But whilst this may well restrict release of plutonium for at least a few hundred years it does not comply with generally accepted disposal criteria. Deep dispersal is the most desirable long term solution because of the long half -life of plutonium (i.e. 24,000 years). This is viewed by as the only means of securing safe disposal that will not require long term safeguards which are subject to the changes of government institutions.’
In Attachment ‘A’ the Cabinet report added this is: ‘The development of formal criteria in Australia for the description and categorisation of long term alpha wastes such as plutonium.’ The TAG report considered that: ‘The present considered level of administrative control [for alpha wastes] will continue to be adequate while gamma radiation fields diminish to a safe level over the next 30 to 50 years.' (That is from 1986 to 2016 and 2036.)
All the above 1986 Cabinet–In-Confidence advice provides just a snap shot in history of the knowledge held by those in government and in science with regard the state of test location radiation hazard and of residual contamination . The 1993 Treaty premeditatedly agreed by 40 series of Cabinet talks to deny in order to avoid accountability and responsibility was already having an impact right at the start of the talks.
Before the Treaty was signed in the early 1990’s the UK and Australian administrations were ‘working together’:
Creation of reciprocal Ministers for Veterans Affairs and Veterans Agency’s to administer the claims of the NTVFC.
Both nations discussed measures in detail to deny claims.
Both nations denied their nuclear veterans being cytogenetically blood tested.
Both nations denied access to unredacted dosimetry records and access to medical records.
Both Veterans Agencies set up Tribunal claims administrations with advice dependent only upon epidemiological studies without blood tests.
Both nations democratically elected administrations became the devil’s advocates in law where the nuclear test veterans and families were involved .
Part Six : OVERALL CONCLUSIONS.
None of this ‘behind closed doors‘ knowledge of course comes as any surprise to the nuclear test veterans and family community in 2024. The denial of truth however comes with the unnecessary regret of decades of accumulated ill-will and treachery from those who govern in both democracies against those who served the nation.
Cytogenetic diagnostic blood tests have been available in the UK since the 1960‘s and clandestine use of them on nuclear workers by 10 years of annual chromosomal blood analysis 1960 to 1979 has been revealed, in archive records, to show that even dosage below the maximum permitted 50mSv per annum, allowed by industry, causes genetic damage. This damage was shown by Medical Research Council, Western Hospital, Edinburgh to increase as dose increases.
Use of this technology would have assisted nuclear veterans to receive earlier remedial treatments for their inherited legacy ill health but has callously been denied.
The premeditated policy of denial had its foundation laid from 1952 when the decision was made that in order to give security during the post WW2 cold war conflict with the Soviet Union, all actions and methods used to attain nuclear weapons were necessary ‘in the national interest ‘ to protect the nuclear energy industry. By using ‘national interest ‘, as a smokescreen the elites of both the UK and Australia were enabled to work together in denial and in treachery.
UK built the nuclear weapons and Australia supplied the uranium and the unlimited use of nuclear test locations from 1952 to 57 on the Australian Continent. The recommendations of the 1985 Royal Commission were ignored due to the expediency the UK and Australia to look after their own government nuclear energy and other industrial interests rather than make provision for any recognition, pensions or compensation for the collateral damage of the nuclear test veteran and family community.
This joint 1993 Treaty of betrayal is a means by which, many now believe, gives some false hope to the establishment of legality to what in effect is an authoritarian diktat. A perversion of the truth worthy only of a totalitarian state such as communist Russia and China today. This is a dangerous ethos that undermines the safeguards and values expected of democracy.
The public in 2024 - and many cross-party politicians - are no longer complacent or gullible enough to accept this situation.
By 1957 archive records show Australia had had enough of the residual fall out contamination by the UK bomb tests. Methods to bury the truth of what happened were developed jointly by a Australia with the UK between 1952 and 1957 and to ’63 with the so-called ‘minor trials’ which released more radiation into the environment of Australia than the 7 major atomic Australia detonations combined.
The mega-yielding UK thermo-nuclear bomb test series Operation Grapple was therefore moved to Christmas Islands in the Pacific. Australia was not prepared to have any more nuclear experiments carried out on their once pristine continent.
Alan Batchelor and many other stalwart nuclear veteran campaigners died shortly before the UK nuclear test medal was granted in 2023. His maxim: ‘Dosimetry inaccuracy is Governments key to avoiding accountability’ still rings true but so also does the withholding, redaction etc of the nuclear veterans’ medical records.
Today in 2024, the political and civil service establishments of both nations, UK and Australia, have learnt nothing at all of the scale of historic disgrace they have bequeathed to both democracies. The lack of moral and ethical code towards the concerns of their electorates has become entrenched enough to effect all citizens. All voters have become subordinated to government policy decisions, often made behind closed doors without open and honest democratic debate. Both nations, without any meaningful settlement of claims for the NTCFC, will therefore inevitably be placed in history as democracies in name only unless they atone for their mistakes.
This is indeed an inherited problem in 2024 with many connotations not entirely political , but with subtle nuances of how a democratic government is enabled to avoid accountability by many means:
By ‘red tape’ : the time-consuming rules and procedures of suffocating bureaucracy. Used to tediously deny nuclear war widow and veterans pension claims etc . An ethos which impacts on every member of the electorate.
By an ‘old boys club’ network and mentality of the elite which places decision makers completely out of touch with the genuine concerns of the electorate. This enables for example, senior rank retired military officers to sit on, or adjudicate on, pension or other claims. With power to accept any discretion or to deny it.
Government appointees of the NRPB (now Health Security Agency) , the AWRE (now AWE), are similar stooges and all known by archive documents to be contractual partners of the Ministry of Defence rather than independent unbiased adjudicators.
Judicial process here in 2024, and increasingly in other western democracies, now seeks to take power from the people by enacting policy decisions made behind closed doors. Decisions without full democratic debate presided over by Judges who no longer have impartial views, but their own political views. All of which and which is erasing the very foundations of open and honest democracy.
Former Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, in a report in the Daily Mail of 30 December 2023 – ‘My fears for democracy when US and UK Judge take power from the people’ wrote:
‘How can we claim moral superiority over autocracies when judges here and in America seek to take power away from the people? All societies are really run by the elite, whatever happens at elections – always have been and always will.’
Let’s face it. The former PM asks: ‘Can we really say it is the sovereign people, and people alone , who get to decide who makes the law.’
From the experience of the NTVFC, the answer is no. The law is made by the elite and the law is perverted to suit governments as the 1993 Treaty between UK and Australia clearly shows. Trust is lost and democracy deserves better. It appears however from the NTVFC experience and archive records, and by others increasingly throughout the United Kingdom, what is needed is radical change of ethics.
The elite government appointees to head Quango Committees whose sole purpose is ‘to help facilitate the policies of government’ however corrupted they are, should be investigated. Along with the corrupt and biased Tribunal hearings of NTVFC claims. All has evolved in other policy areas since the 1993 Treaty. All can be, and is, perverted for political reasons.
The above and many other facts detrimental to our standing as a democracy, are emerging into public and cross – party political perception. This is thanks to the incredible freedom of expression and investigative needs of the public in the media. But for how long?
Former Prime Minister Boris Johnson, the first ever PM in 70 years to do so, in 2022 listened with open ears, to a delegation of the NTVFC in a face to face, 40 minute meeting and was shocked to see the evidence of Governments withholding of evidence. He said the governments archives should be fully opened to release the documents required by the LABRATS / DAILY MIRROR and for the NTV / Medical Record Case mentioned above in Part One.
Further historical note of interest:
H. During the seven years 1985 to 1993, focused upon in this Newsletter, archive records reveal that during the early 1990’s the British Nuclear Test Veterans Association - founded in 1983 by Scottish nuclear test veteran Ken McGinley - was making significant progress by his leaderships ‘all we seek is justice campaign‘ . This was to gain war pensions and compensation for the nuclear veterans , widows and families.
This significant progress came following the visit to London in 1985 by lawyers of the Australian Royal Commission seeking answers to the UK nuclear weapon test experiments carried out in Australia and the legacy of radioactive contamination shockingly left behind in 1967 . The archive documents of the early 1990’s obtained recently by LABRATS reveal the BNTVA was ‘infiltrated’. This was done by the MOD and contractual partners to ‘spike the guns’ of the Chairman’s ‘all we seek is justice campaign’.
In the following years the British and Australia Associations became effectively neutered by premeditated policy decisions. Only the NZNTVA under the Chairmanship of Roy Sefton QSM in New Zealand remained unscathed by the treachery because the New Zealand government was not a signatory of the 1993 bi-lateral treaty of deception. The accumulated archive history of the UK nuclear test veterans and family community, since the first UK bomb test of 1952, has revealed a premeditated policy that has become a perversion of the ethics and morality expected of democratic leaderships. More is likely to emerge.
It is said that knowledge is power. The bi-lateral political decisions of the 1993 Treaty gave power to successive administrations, UK and Australian, for 3o years to undemocratically subvert litigation they knew from 1985 was coming.
Copy of this email is going to McCue, Jury and Partners LLP as a submission of evidence for the NTV medical records case.
CHANV 08012024
FUND RAISING FOR THE LEGAL CASE TO OBTAIN MEDICAL RECORDS FOR NUCLEAR TEST VETERAN AND FAMILY COMMUNITY DENIED LEGAL AID.
If you are interested in more information of the 1952 – 67 British Nuclear Bomb Tests and the 70 year fall-out of this programme on the NTVFC please note:
PDF format copy of ‘ A Legacy of Inherited Criminality’ / 164 pages - chronological exposure of the betrayal , cover-up and withholding of evidence of the UK’s nuclear weapon test experiments since 1952 is available by contacting Labrats International’s website:
All profits will go to LABRATS international community interest company to continue the nuclear test veteran and family community’s fight for truth and justice undertaken with cross-party Members of Parliament support .
Also in PDF format copy of ‘ The UK’s Nuclear Scandal ‘ / 309 pages – the true history of Britain’s nuclear weapon test experiments 1952 to 67 / – a Cold War legacy of power , prestige and profit for the few at the cost of global collateral damage for the many . All profits will also go to continue the fight for truth and justice .
For updates on the campaign link to www.labrats.international web site for copies of ‘Atom’ magazine – Worldwide news for the atomic family issued quarterly.
Ref : CHANV Newsletter 08012024 - FOOTNOTES
Compiled by Dennis Hayden. I’m a nuclear test veteran, V-Club Associate of LABRATS, founder of the Combined Veterans’ Forum International in 2002 - to exchange and gather information from British, Australian and New Zealand nuclear veteran associations and others to assist with the Atomic Veterans Group Litigation of 2005 to 2014 led by Rosenblatt Solicitors of London - spokesperson for the CHANV and author of two books in support of justice for all who served at UK nuclear weapon test locations in Australia and the Pacific 1952 to 67.
MEDICAL RECORDS CASE AND WITHHOLDING OF BLOOD TESTS
In 1966 as an RAF Junior Technician (with severe inflammation of the eyes – iritis) I was a medical evacuee from Maralinga after 11 months of one year nuclear service. I was evacuated initially to RAAF Hospital Edinburgh Field, Maralinga Support Unit, near Adelaide and thence onwards to a military hospital in the UK. In 1992, the eye condition was judged a medical examination the Department of Health and Social Security (DHSS), with a linked second medical condition in 1969 and the medical surgery involved , as ‘attributable to military service‘.
From 1969 after three years global flying duties, with onset of he second medical condition attributed by the DHSS to the first condition at Maralinga I spent over 100 days at various military hospitals including a joint services rehabilitation centre and for almost all of the time, until my 12 year contracted engagement ended of 1974, I was medically downgraded fit only for light RAF administrative desk work within the United Kingdom only.
From 1992 I’ve made attempts to obtain full unredacted copies of my medical records and radiation level conditions at Maralinga. That is in 1992, 2004 and 2022/3 without success so far. Five years of annual medical examinations at RAF Central Medical Establish which included blood tests have been said to have been sent to my GP. But this has not been confirmed as having been received by my GP.
I have registered as a claimant for medical records with McCue , Jury and Partners LLP and advise other surviving nuclear veterans and genetically damaged descendants to consider doing so .The content of this newsletter is intended to assist all claimants.
SOURCE OF CONTENT OF THIS NEWSLETTER.
The content of this Newsletter is taken from archive records sourced over many years from many sources internationally, including the media, independent scientific experts and others and stated without prejudice to past, current or indeed any future litigation which may be forced upon the nuclear test veterans and family community campaign for justice by UK government, without any legal aid. The campaign is led by the UK’s non-government organisation (NGO) LABRATS INTERNATIONAL Community Interest Company and the UK’s national newspaper the DAILY MIRROR.
Any recipient(s) therefore, in the interests of freedom of information in a democracy, may pass copy of this newsletter to any other person(s) or organisation(s) of choice who may be interested in this subject.
Legal Advisor to the CHANV is Ian Anderson , legal practitioner on three continents in civil, criminal and human rights cases, including chemical and radiation cases ( nuclear tests and accidents ) and a Scottish Advocate and Attorney at Law ( New York ).
Comments