AN OPEN LETTER ON BEHALF OF THE COMBINED HISTORY ARCHIVE OF NUCLEAR VETERANS (CHANV)
In the interests of Freedom of Information expected in a mature democracy anyone reading this blog may pass copy to any third party individual or organisation of their choice.
The content is stated without prejudice to past , present or possibly any future legal action that may be considered necessary by the Nuclear Test Veteran and Family Community.
Legal advisor to the CHANV is Ian Anderson, International Advocate and Attorney at Law (New York)
To : Dr Andrew Murrison , Minister for Defence People and Families
From : Dennis Hayden.
Founder of the Combined Veterans’ Forum International (2002)
V- Club Associate of Labrats International.
Nuclear Veteran, Maralinga 1965/6
Author of ‘The UK’s Nuclear Scandal.’ (2021), ‘ A Legacy of Inherited Criminality’ (2023)
08 DECEMBER 2203 Reference : CHANV 101223/NTV:Med.records 281123
In support of all British and Commonwealth (Mainly Australian and NZ) veterans and families who participated in the UK bomb tests 1952–67.
Dear Dr Murrison,
Throughout all of recorded history one maxim has remained constant : all truths, despite vehement denial become self evident.
ARCHIVE HISTORY SHOWS A PREMEDITATED POLICY OF PERFIDITY HAS BEEN DEPLOYED AGAINST THE NUCLEAR TEST VETERANS AND FAMILY COMMUNITY.
It’s some years, over a decade in fact, since I last had need to contact you. This was in 2009/10 when you were appointed as ‘political advisor’ to the Military Covenant Commission initiated by the then Leader of the Conservative Party Leader, David Cameron MP.
Since then, a brighter light of truth has been shone into the darkness of the deception of evolved against the claims of the nuclear test veterans and family community (NTVFC).
But, of course, there is still very much that must be done by any politician in the position you now hold to remedy this situation. Whether you are helpful is entirely up to you because history will be the judge.
The fact of the matter is you have responsibilities for which you must be held accountable, to Parliament and to the whole electorate of the United Kingdom. The NTVFC have been politically denied legal aid, discriminated against by a biased Tribunal system and abandoned so only the voices of Members of Parliament, the independent press and non-government organisations are able to challenge nuclear test veterans policy that is in need of radical change.
Without full accountability our standing as credible modern democracy will continue to be undermined.
The negative political culture against the NTVFC which is confirmed by a chronological archive history which you have been part of since 2009 (see comments below with regard to the Military Covenant Commission 2009 to 2010) has now been clearly confirmed again by the response you gave to cross- party Members of Parliament during the Nuclear Test Veteran : Medical Records debate of 28 November 2023.
All MP’s who took part in the debate, in particular Rebecca Long-Bailey (Labour) , Sir John Hayes (Conservative) and the Chairman Martin Vickers MP are thanked for their support in securing this debate.
The points by those who spoke : Rebecca Long-Bailey, Sir John Hayes, Richard Foord, Dr James Davies, Rachel Hopkins, Jim Shannon, Mrs Emma Lewell–Buck, Scott Benton, Chris Evans, Stella Creasy and Luke Pollard show the degree to which the Ministry of Defence and contractual partners the AWE (former AWRE), Public Health England (former NRPB), the military chiefs of staff and others have worked together since 1993 to ensure science and other advice given to Ministers by senior MOD officials is controlled and biased against the truth. Primarily this autocratic deception is achieved by deliberately withholding personal records from claimants, and from their lawyers, to assist in claims .
Others involved in the debate deserving praise, besides Rebecca Long-Bailey MP and Sir John Hayes MP, are those who participated in the 2022 ‘look me in the eye campaign’ led by Alan Owen Director of the Community Interest Company - LABRATS International and Susie Boniface freelance journalist of the Daily Mirror.
Future debates are needed and should include the Minister for Veterans, Johnny Mercer MP. This is because Mr Mercer has a seat in cabinet and support of officials from the Office of Veterans Agency (OVA).
YOUR RESPONSE TO MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT IN THE DEBATE (AND SIMILAR STATEMENTS BY BARONESS GOLDIE IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS EARLIER THIS YEAR) HAS PLACED THE MINISTRY OF DEFENCE ON THE WRONG SIDE OF HISTORY OF WHAT HAS BECOME IN 71 YEARS A POLITICAL PROBLEM OF MINISTRY OF DEFENCE’S OWN MAKING.
Since the first British nuclear bomb test of 1952, the Ministry of Defence has only learned how to avoid accountability by denying responsibility for the scientific truths of radiation hazard. Repeating biased science which lacks credibility as the means to enforce policy against the nuclear test community and withholding evidence has been recently been recognised by many as criminality.
Scientific control and premeditated cover- up extends beyond 7I years. Archive records from the 1920’s show even low dose exposure to alpha radioactive particles causes cancer and other serious legacy ill heath and fatality. In 1951, after seeing the data of ill health from the fall out of radiation on the victims of the 1945 atomic bombing of Japan, Professor Alex Haddow, Director of the Chester Beatty Research Institute, Royal Cancer Hospital, London wrote to the Director of the Atomic Energy Authority, Sir John Cockcroft:
‘It will become increasingly difficult to counter those who already believe that there is some sort of conspiracy of silence enforced by committees of stooges .’
This was written after Professor Haddow had also read the report of the significant impact of US nuclear bomb tests and had studied the increase in number of Japanese leukaemia cases. Professor Haddow ended his 1951 letter by writing in reference to the UK bomb testing due to begin in 1952:
‘ one has in mind not the state of affairs today
but what it may be in 50 years time’ .
The ‘conspiracy of silence’ and ‘committees of stooges’ continued with government science studies with conclusions biased by epidemiologists without reference to blood test analysis. Fifty years has confirmed this eminent biologists 1951 concerns about the fall out hazard of nuclear bomb testing.
The year 1993 is pivotal to the MOD’s evolved negative policy towards the NTVFC which you, as Minister for Defence People and Families and others briefed by officials , have inherited.
1993 is sixteen years before you became Shadow Conservative Minister for Veterans and nominated as ‘political advisor’ for Conservative Leader David Cameron’s Opposition 2009 initiative of a Military Covenant Commission (MCC). A Commission was promised to be ‘enshrined into law’. This promise was reneged upon by the advice of MOD officials when David Cameron became PM following the 2010 General Election.
It came as no surprise in 2010 to nuclear veterans and widows during the Atomic Veterans Group Litigation led by Rosenblatts of London. The 2009 launch document the MCC conveniently stated in terms of reference – ‘any recommendations of the Commission will be dependent on existing MOD budget considerations.’
During your position as ‘political advisor’ for David Cameron’s 2009/10 MCC I emailed to you on behalf of the CVFI a 24 August 1993 archive letter from Dr John Reid MP, armed force spokesperson for the Labour Party in Opposition, who later became Secretary of State for Defence in the 1997 Tony Blair government. This letter stated the Labour Party policy towards the nuclear test veterans.
Dr Reid wrote in 1993 :
‘ It is our firm view that the nuclear test veterans should be regarded in the
same way as any other service man or woman who was injured in the service
of their country and we constantly asked the government
to take this approach. Unfortunately , the government still refuses to
concede the principle involved but you will be sure that we will maintain
our pressure upon them to do so since it is only in this fashion we can
reasonably expect that justice will be done , even after all this time .’
However, 4 months after Dr John Reid’s letter in December 1993 the British government signed a Bi-Lateral Treaty (worked on since the mid-1980’s) with the Federal Australian Government in Canberra to jointly deny any compensation or war pension claims to armed forces personal involved in the UK nuclear test programme. UK government policy towards the NTVFC was governed by this Treaty from this date. This premeditated bad faith continued by successive governments from 1993.
This answers the ‘cover up’ point raised by MP’s on 20 November. ( note:details of the 1993 Treaty only emerged during the mid- 2000’s from Australian contacts.)
Your comment on Dr Reid’s letter to me in 2010 was that the 1997 Labour Government’s reneging on the principle laid out in Dr Reid’s August 1993 letter was “rather sickening”. But no more “sickening” of course, when taking account of your own involvement as ‘political advisor’ in the premeditated reneged MCC fiasco of 2009/10.
Recently obtained 1993 archive records show the MOD infiltrated the British Nuclear Test Veterans Association to neuter and disable the Association’s ‘all we seek is justice ‘ campaign. This infiltration set in trend the demise of the Association as being a viable campaigning organisation. The Australian Nuclear Veterans Association was impacted similarly by the 1993 Treaty. This could be described historically, as a 20th century version of 17th century imperial ‘divide and rule’ ethos used to enforce subjugation to policy decisions decided by heads of government.
The brief period when nuclear veteran war disability claims (1991 to 1992) were handled by the Department of Health and Social Security (DHSS) from 1993 were placed under control of the newly initiated Veterans Agency under a newly created junior Minister for Veterans.
This date period coincides with the MOD infiltration of the BNTVA of the early 1990’s mentioned above.
The Treaty against the NTVFC invoked significant change. Veterans affairs passed from a Parliamentary Under Secretary of State to a newly created Minister for Veterans. A new Veterans Agency was formed to control Tribunals etc.The bi-lateral UK / Australia Treaty of December 1993 saw the same replicated system arrangement made in Australia. Both nations from this date exchanged information and worked together to promote epidemiological studies as policy of radiation damage whilst dismissing advanced cytogenetic blood analysis giving precise details of the genetic damage of veterans as unnecessary.
The NZ government did not sign the 1993 treaty but in 1999 they were warned at a meeting in New Zealand with the British High Commissioner: ‘any help to nuclear veterans would be regarded as an unfriendly act by the British Government.’
Cytogenetic studies outside of UK MOD control were deemed unwelcome. Although in 2007, Rhona Anderson the UK’s leading cytogeneticist of Brunel University was keen to get involved. But only with epidemiology being applied to the conclusions published. Archive records show this is indicative of a system of studies published and epidemiological biased and diminished whilst the full research report is filed for ‘government eyes only.’
On 1st March 2007 my own constituency MP Mark Harper, then Shadow Minister for Veterans for the Conservative party, admitted by letter that alpha particles ‘are very energetic but cannot penetrate the skin is an emitter of radiation. However , if ingested , alpha particles ionise bodily tissue , harming the body destroying internal organs.’ After this admission of the ‘prime causal link’ of legacy ill health of nuclear test veterans it came as no surprise that Mr Harper did not become Minister for Veterans in David Cameron’s Government after the 2010 General Election.
Meanwhile the UK government has taken great pains to ignore the findings of the ‘crucial and pivotal’ evidence of the New Zealand Professor Al Rowland study of Massey University, Wellington. A work of excellence for which this eminent cytogeneticist was decorated by Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth.
Your response to Members of Parliament in the 28 November debate praised the ‘efficacy’ of the recent small cytogenetic study led by Professor Rhona Anderson of Brunel University. The fact of the matter is the terms of reference of this study state the studies conclusions would be written by a co-leader of the study, that is by an epidemiologist, Dr Julian Peto, known in archive records to have strong links with the Ministry of Defence. Dr Peto was actually seen during breaks in the 2007 Parliamentary Inquiry (Nuc Vets) traveling backwards and forwards to the MOD buildings close by.
[Further note : Dr Peto, Chaired the 2007 Parliamentary Inquiry-Nuclear Veterans-which was supposed to last 2 days. The NZ Rowland cytogenetic blood test study due to be peer reviewed in 2008 and was listed on the Inquiry agenda. Brunel University expressed interest in this being replicated in UK. The Rowland Study was excluded from the Inquiry agenda and replaced instead by two NRPB doctors from the NRPB extolling the efficacy of the 1980’s etc epidemiological studies , much to the annoyance of nuclear veterans and the press who were present.]
The biased NRPB studies from the 1980’s continue to be extolled by the UK government when in fact, they have been noted by many independent experts as having methodology etc that the has been “perverted for political reasons.”
Around the time of your appointment as ‘political advisor ‘ to the MCC scandal, the words of Ben Browne KC, Lead Barrister for the Atomic Veterans Group Litigation (led by Rosenblatt Solicitors of London) during the London High Court Limitation Trial allowing all 1000 plus veteran and widow cases to proceed for compensation claims during the in 2009 give clarity to the truth when he wrote:
‘ The MOD should have known the claimants were exposed to radiation , failed to make reasonable care for health and safety for both external [ gamma radiation released during detonations ] and internal radiation [ inhaled and ingested from fall-out ], failed to consider the aftermath of the tests , allowed claimants to enter zones of radioactive fallout or contamination, failed to provide adequate PPE to claimants , failed to ensure seafood caught and known to be contaminated by radiation was not consumed , failed to account for weather patterns and film badges did not measure nor were capable of measuring alpha and beta potential levels for inhalation or ingestion .’
Despite the vast expense by the MOD’s use of Treasury Solicitors and government funded epidemiology (without blood tests) to ignore and bias the above astute legal assessment, by Ben Browne KC, his testimony still holds true today. Even with regard to all litigation undertaken from 2005 to 2014, including the press acknowledged inconclusive 4:3 Supreme Court Judgement of 2012 when Nuclear Veteran Expert Witnesses were barred from giving evidence on the effects of inhaled and ingested ionising fall out radiation.
Personal hand held dosimeters, issued just to 1% of servicemen have been found to only record dose measurements up to a maximum of 50 mSv. Regardless of the actual dose present at test locations. In the successful 2012 First Tier Freedom of Information Hearing of nuclear veteran David Whyte attended by Susie Boniface renown freelance journalist, Shirley Denson nuclear widow, Dai Williams an independent academic and myself the information sought by David Whyte is admitted as being withheld by the MOD’s contractual partner the Atomic Weapons Establishment.
This was said to be due to intervention by the freedom of information team of the Strategic Weapons office of the MOD. The emails of which, between AWE / MOD, the Tribunal judge admitted he was not given copy of. It was said by the MOD’s witness two record files are held, one named ‘Merlin’ the other the MOD witness said he did not have security clearance to name .
Archive records since indicate personal dose readings and other records are possibly buried in the new 2017 depository – Nucleus - in the far northern tip of Scotland along with: Australian records shipped many reported to include the missing medical records from the Hospital at RAAF Edinburg Field which treated nuclear veterans from the Maralinga nuclear weapon test location.
The 9 June 2009 High Court verdict by Mr Justice Foskett stated the ‘ prime causal link’ to the nuclear veterans legacy ill health etc is radioactive fall out .The Professor Rowland cytogenetic blood test study (mentioned above) showed three times elevated chromosomal translocations (genetic damage) in NZ veterans who took part in the nuclear tests compared to contemporary veterans who had not attended a test location. This study is also stated as being ‘crucial and pivotal’ evidence by the High Court Judge in 2009.
Britain’s leading cytogeneticist Rhona Anderson of Brunel actually confirmed by writing to Rosenblatt solicitors that the world renown first independent and peer reviewed Rowland Study (free from UK MOD interference) had been conducted in ‘precise and meticulous detail’ . The Rowland study is also acclaimed by eminent cytogeneticists in the United States and elsewhere.
Members of Parliament in the 28 November debate mentioned ‘cover ups‘. (See also above) The response, given by you as Minister for Defence People and Families during the debate, gave no credible or detailed answer to this point . Whilst archive records confirm the self evident and obvious truth.
There is indeed much more than can be said. Nuclear Test Veterans are becoming fewer as each year passes but are thankful the quest for justice has been extremely successfully taken up by first and second generation descendants of the veterans. This political problem of the MOD’s own making will therefore not go away.
Damage of exposure to radiation is in the DNA of nuclear test veteran descendants and this is the mark of the atomic bomb identified by cytogenetic blood tests. The descendants of course have access to the media with far more technological expertise and means of communicating this understanding than the writer of this email.
The above, in historic terminology, covers the MOD’s ‘final solution’. A premeditated solution to avoid accountability for 71 years by placing evidence, by any means possible at any expense to the public purse, beyond the reach of supporters and lawyers acting on behalf of the NTV community.
This therefore is of course the similar inherited holocaustic/nihilistc doctrine favoured by undemocratic states from 1930’s Germany, the cold war’s USSR, Russia today and other autocracies, ideological dictatorships etc worldwide who ignore or rewrite history and are enabled to abandon all ethics and morality. Democracy is said to the guardian of truth in an ever increasing dangerous world. But the Ministry of Defence seems deliberately oblivious to this fact.
However since 1952, sufficient information has entered the public domain for the NTVFC to be successful in any future litigation they may be forced to undertake today or in the future. The truth is self-evident despite the vehement denials.
Thank you for the response made to the concerns of MP’s on 28 November. It’s helpful for everyone to know what’s happening in real time rather than from archive records retrieved 10 or 20 years later.
This is written with thanks to all MP’s who have mentioned their nuclear test constituents. The mention of the recently departed Douglas Hern, constituent of Sir John Hayes MP, who I have known since 1985 . Mr Hern’s life is an example of a veteran who worked tirelessly for the BNTVA in support of other nuclear veterans where he became a valuable member the executive committee only to be treated abysmally by the Trustee led Association in the last years of his life.
Despite the known infiltration of the Association by the MOD in the early 1990’s Doug did not accept an intent that all nuclear test veteran personal records should be enabled to fall into the hands of the Ministry of Defence . He insisted they belong to the NTVFC to remain free of control by the MOD rather than end buried in the 2017 Scottish depository. Hopefully the records acquired by British, Australian and New Zealand veterans and associations will help provide the true history for todays and future generations of students and colleges history faculties who need to know this modern history of the nation.
Doug , although he was appointed as litigation secretary by the BNTVA, ( during the 2005 to 2014 Atomic Veterans Group Litigation led by Rosenblatts when the Chairman and infiltrated Trustees favoured the MOD’s no - fault settlement of claims) admitted this title was in merely ‘window dressing‘. A means by which to show the BNTVA supported claims for compensation and accountability when Doug knew this to be untrue: the intent of the MOD is to bury the truth .
This brief history overview is therefore circulated to thank all Members of Parliament who spoke during the 28 November Debate. The focus on the subject of the withholding of nuclear test veterans medical records and the general negative culture evolved to deliberately, by policy, deny a duty of care to the 30,000 plus British and Commonwealth armed forces (20,000+ British and 10,000+ mainly Australian and New Zealand Commonwealth participants) is a fact of history .
The planning of this legacy of criminality began in the 1950’s : the need for experimentation on equipment and men is part of the ‘it is a pity, but we cannot help it’ admission (1955) by Prime Minister Sir Anthony Eden to assist nuclear industry. This ethos was developed and progressed from 1952 MonteBello Islands to 1953 – 57 Emu Field and Maralinga bomb tests - to measure impact of radioactive fall out on unprotected servicemen in comparison to the AWRE scientists who wore full protective equipment with respirators. (As admitted in archive document Biological Investigations at Atomic Bomb Tests in Australia 1956 a study overseen by the AWE as a joint venture by the UK and Australian Governments.)
By time the Operation Grapple series of nuclear megaton tests at Christmas Island commenced in 1957 this deception was fully practiced and in place being used. The servicemen participants in the bomb testing were placed not only in a situation of ‘risk and rigour’ during ’52 to 67’ they were ignored, overlooked, lied to, recklessly exposed to radiation and left to die after returning to civilian life.
The veterans have several whistle blowers scientific and nuclear veteran to thank for the insight we have today of the extent of the betrayal during this period.
Dr Andrew it is suffice to say what had historically evolved before you entered politics and became ‘political advisor ‘ for the 2009 MCC, is biased information briefed by senior civil servants within the MOD which lacks credibility.
Primarily this advice came from Dr Ann Braidwood (a discredited ‘expert witness’ of the MOD during the 2005 -2014 Atomic Veterans Group Litigation) whose Service Personnel Radiation Advice compiled manual of biased advise to Ministers, Chiefs of Staffs and Tribunal executives etc is overtaken by the understanding in 2023 that there is no safe dose of ionising radioactive fall out above normal background radiation once it is inhaled or ingested inside the body.
(Medical Research Council Cytogenetic, 10 year annual blood test study from 1968 published 1979 – Dr HJ Evans et al – Radiation Induced Chromosome Aberrations in Dockyard Workers found there was significant increase in chromosome damage in workers even with exposures below the maximum permissible level of 50 mSv per annum and this genetic damage was found to increase as the annual exposure dose increased.)
Yours sincerely ,
Dennis Hayden
Forest of Dean constituency of Mark Harper MP, Gloucestershire .
Comments