TASC is supported by a wide variety of people with diverse concerns about the impact Sizewell C would have. The comments on this page are taken from some of the emails we have received from supporters.

...I am amazed that so many people think it is a done deal, driven by our MP`s deliberate assumptions and statements.

I live in Westleton. Do you have a poster that I could print and put in the village shop, or shall I do my own?...


...thank you for your email it was nice to have met you and i was interested in what you had to say it did open my eyes a bit for me and i did look at sizewell in a different way and yes i do agree with a lot of what you had to say and i would love to talk to the powers to be one on one to ask him about the things you spoke about …


...My personal view on nuclear power is that in these days of rising sea levels etc nuclear power is ever more vulnerable .I would be in favour of following suit to Germany and phase out nuclear power-I believe they are aiming for it to be gone in the next 15 years or so.If you go to Germany you see solar panels on roofs etc everywhere-we installed them a year or so ago -we have a power credit each month of £30,they have performed well...


...We are new members, very interested, both of us spoke briefly at the TASC meeting recently and we would very much like to be involved. We are settling in after a retirement move from London, and will want to come to meetings etc. If there are contacts nearer us - Bealings/Woodbridge/Grundisburgh, maybe there is a way we might get in contact ? ...


...very good meeting yesterday and very informative. I wondered if you wanted to send me a couple of A4 sheets of the petition - I am sure I could collect a few signatures together and it would help bring notice to the TASC group....


...I've been to two meetings of TASC and am doing all I can to spread the word and support our aims.

With that in mind, I have some suggestions:

It seems to me after talking to a number of people who are pro-SizewellC that there are three main arguments

that need constant rebutting:

1. A big boost to employment in this area

2. The UK's requirement for more power

3. The sheer aquiesence that it's going to happen anyway and it won't have that much effect on the area. i.e. people just don't get the scale of the disruption that will be caused: nor do they understand the dangers. While urging people to write letters is all very well, I do wonder whether even supporters of TASC will do that in enough numbers to make a difference.

There is an easier way to garner support:

TASC should have a number of brief letters ready and waiting, covering each 'argument' likely to be made in favour of SizewellC.

This could be posted on your website and/or emailed to supporters so that their name can simply be added to the letter and emailed out or printed off and sent. I know Amnesty and Greenpeace work this way.

That way, all arguments made by the pro-nuclear lobby can be instantly attacked.


I am willing to help with leafleting, please let me know what's needed

Two things that on reflection, do not appear to have been mentioned anywhere so far:

Tourism - Suffolk benefits hugely from its reputation amongst the chattering classes / artists for being relatively peaceful, good light, etc....... On the back page of the tourist publication  'Coast',

 there is a map showing walking areas, National Trust sites, listing towns and villages - no mention of Sizewell, slap bang between Aldeburgh and Southwold. It is as if it doesn't exist, according to the tourist authority, who have just spent rather a lot of money advertising Suffolk by hiring premises in London, and by a 50,000 household mailshot. Do they really think that people won't notice a lot of traffic, including lorries, and areas closed off, that on most peoples maps, if they are even only a year plus old, will be shown as available to roam ? Perhaps Suffolk Tourism needs a few implications of the proposals for Sizewell pointing out. For one thing, if visitors think that they've been mislead by omission by a tourist authority, not only will they not come back, but they are likely to dismiss Suffolk as a whole,  as a destination to their friends.

Terrorism was touched on, but since that TASC meeting, the situation between North and South Korea has deteriorated, and an escalation to the use of nuclear weapons has been mentioned - waste materials from a nuclear power plant, which we now know have little or no chance of being sent elsewhere for reprocessing, will always be a terrorist target as a source material, and if the UK were to close down it's nuclear programme, as Germany is doing, there would be that much less available. Quite apart from the risk from the theft of materials, any damage to storage facilities may allow contamination of the coastline and sea - thinking of how much lower the ground level is behind the sea walls in that area, I would think that this is a very real risk.


...we do have a problem with some local views that it means jobs, and also a belief that money will come in through B&B.

About 30 years ago I spent many hours at the Science Library researching the effects of ionizing radiation (mobile phone mast not wanted)..there was not much of use and at the inquiry they refused any evidence on health grounds..that is something to watch. I hope that there is a lot more evidence now and that you find an expert to trawl through it, and has the time . The internet helps!! Some years ago armed police used to patrol the Sizewell area by the way, so of course a threat was perceived...


Some topics that need to be pursued.

1 The amount of power that would be going down the transmission lines if Sizewell C is built, which would also include the offshore wind farm power, could amount to 15% of the National Demand . The sudden loss of this amount power, say by terrorists blowing down a couple of pylons a very easy thing to do, could probably cause the National Grid to go unstable and result in shutting down a large part of the UK. If this was followed up at Hinkley Point then the Country would be without power for a long time. There would be just too much power coming from Sizewell.

2 Because the power down the Transmission lines would be increased the risk of health effects would be increased with the most probable being leukemia in youngsters.

3 The power from Sizewell C would be destined for London and about 15% would be lost before it got there! More power stations should be built near central London, well if Nuclear are now so safe, why not?

4 The shore off Sizewell is shallow and the rise and fall of the tide is the lowest in the UK. This means that the cooling water required for Sizewell C will probably suffer recirculation effecting the efficiency of the Station and also cause damage to the coast.

5 Because of the developments that have taken place in Leiston since 1982, (it has doubled in population), the Emergency plans are no longer fit for purpose.

6 Because the British nuclear industry, which once led the World, has been dismantled by Governments, it is no longer fir for purpose, all the expertise has been lost. If nuclear is to go ahead it should be a National owned comprehensive industry able to deal with the whole fuel cycle including the safe disposal of the waste.

As for future meetings I suggest you concentrate on the media and Councilors especially as the County Councilors are now up for reelection. Why not call a meeting inviting all SCDC and SCC Councilors, as well as the EADT, Look East, About Anglia and even the Daily Telegraph to attend and hear the views and concerns of the local people. I would be quite happy to address such a meeting. As I was the CEGB's local advocate for Sizewell B it could have quite an impact that I am now against Sizewell C.


...We must have more direct action it seems the only way to get attention and challenge the nuclear industry. We could write a green manifesto for Leiston and Sizewell to illustrate the positive alternatives and job creation potential of the area for local people along the lines of the one by the green party....


...Thank you for the Leiston meeting report, it was a very good meeting and it helped a little not to feel quite so defeated. It is very difficult to see how we can get the information through to the decision makers. I had persuaded my husband to come with me that evening and he was glad that he had attended....


...Thank you for excellent notes. I attended the meeting and found it very informative - really good speakers. The notes will be especially helpful as I have promised to brief some friends who were unable to attend the meeting....


I have signed up too to help if I can. Good luck and thank you for taking this on. The more we learn, the more unbelievable these proposals seem… we must do everything we can to influence things.- so I am especially grateful to you and TASC for getting things going.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------There's a piece in today's EADT - double page spread - talkiing about the coastal erosion caused by the current weather. So much for SizewellC not having to worry about the tide!!!


Do we know a lawyer that would be prepared to investgate the viability of challenging the government in the courts about the planning contradiction of granting temporary planning permission for the storage of nuclear waste knowing full well that waste will be stored on these sites for the foreseeable future?
Another thought. Could we share the cost of any litigation with other anti nuclear groups who will have the same issue with permenent waste storage on sites with planning for temporary storage?

...I read an article I thought TASC may find of interest.It was in Coastal scene March 8th 2013 by TimYeo Mp.He was calling on the government to have a contingency plan if the nuclear reactors wern't built in time....


...It is surprising just how ignorant of the facts those in authority are. The thing is they have destroyed the whole of the British electricity industry, which was a world leader in all aspects of generation and distribution, but won't admit their errors. So they are pretending everything is now ok, just ask the foreigners to get us out of the mess. They all lack logic in their approach....


I think in terms of campaigning tactics:

1. There's a need to get information across to the public about the ridiculousness of the proposed emergency zone in comparison to Japan, USA and in terms of real life. e.g. coastal winds, etc. Make it relevant to people - e.g. if you live here XX on the map, you would have been evacuated from your home for x months/years under Japanese and USA safety regulations because you and your house/land/garden would have been subject to radiation levels of xxx. This level of radiation causes x, y, z to happen in humans and animals. Why are British regulations so lax in comparison? Your maps are brilliant for this. Maybe some cartoons would work too? And, what about so-called radiation tablets - are there some myths about these too that could be exposed? Overall it all seems to be a cover up etc

2. Also, the vulnerability of the East coast to erosion - people remember the 1953 floods etc. How much worse would a nuclear accident be, than the 1953 floods? I think we have to get the message to people in a way they can relate to it.

3. Also the level of government subsidy required - how much public money is involved with the whole-life cost of nuclear, including decommissioning and long-term waste management? And what about the cost of clearing up after a nuclear accident - who covers this? The public? Would this mean tax rises? e.g. How much has the Japanese incident cost?

 Perhaps these points could be conveyed in a page advert in the East Anglian Daily Times and EDP? I'd be willing to chip in some money £10-£20 - but I've no idea how much it would all cost. Local radio is also a good medium - e.g. Radio Suffolk, also community radio stations.

Are you working with other campaign groups and will there be any nationally-focussed action? A national lobby of parliament perhaps? Is there any scope for a national legal challenge under the human rights act as this is being imposed on us without consultation etc? And taking into account the evidence of countries that are phasing out their nuclear power... etc Sorry, just some brief thoughts


If you can send me some petition forms -I think it will be  a good way to get a number of people from my area interested and possibly on board-its more concrete than me just talking about it  I think. Also I will try writing to the local paper maybe highlighting the way the Germans are moving away from nuclear power. I suppose the more TASC can be mentioned in the press the more people that will get on board.


Regret I am unable to attend the meeting, but would suggest targetting tourism organisations - it was admitted, finally, in the paper today ( EADT, i think ), that the proposal is for two reactors, not one, that most of the jobs will be taken by a transitory workforce ( who will require temporary housing and transport ), with all the upheaval that implies, and that EDF are not remotely concerned about proposals for waste transport and storage, 'because that is the responsibility of your government' ie the British government. Bear in mind governments have no money - that means the bill will fall to the tax payer - us. Are you happy to have your taxes spent on nuclear waste storage - I am not, as I view it as a toxic legacy for our children, and an easy target for terrorists. Suffolk recently spent a lot on promoting the Heritage Coast, in particular, as a tourist destination - with heavy vehicle traffic and construction noise, it is more likely to turn people away from Suffolk in the longer term - and their friends - bearing in mind that Suffolk specifically targetted the more well heeled Londoners. False economy ? The 'jobs for Suffolk'  cry is a red herring - just check how many people are in full time employment at Sizewell now - and, whether they were indigenous to Suffolk before the start of Sizewell in the first place, or moved here for work - no problem there, just that the skills mix for working in a nuclear power station is not necessarily going to be filled locally, so its not really a 'jobs for Suffolk' project, but it leaves Suffolk with a serious blight on the landscape.


I think it might be helpful if I explain my position. I worked in the nuclear industry all my working life. I was appointed to Sizewell A in 1962, while the station was still being built, as Station Health Physicist. This meant I was responsible for radiological safety on the site, environmental monitoring, the emergency plans and training, etc. In 1980 because of my strong support in nuclear power I was invited, at the instigation of the CEGB Chairman, to represent the CEGB locally with respect to their case for Sizewell B. I accepted and pay wise it was simply a sideways move.

My support for nuclear was mainly because of my concern at the rate fossil fuels was being consumed and the possible environmental impact the reckless use of fossil fuels would have. I still hold that view.

I am now strongly opposed to Sizewell C because

It concentrates too much power from one location and such a policy will endanger the security of our Country.

I am concerned at the health risks from such heavily loaded transmission lines

If there is a slight risk of a nuclear accident then, because of the way Leiston has been developed by SCDC, the population could not be protected.

If there is no risk of a nuclear accident effecting Leiston then there is no reason why such stations could not be built near centres of demand, ie London.

East Anglia does not need the power from yet another station. Sizewell C would in effect be generating to feed London and about 15%- 20% of the power would be lost in the process

Other reasons include the site not being large enough, its vulnerability to attack from the sea via Minsmere, cooling water requirements, etc.

Furthermore I am opposed to any more nuclear establishments until the Government is prepared to take them into public ownership and re-establish a viable nuclear industry able to produce reactor fuel, design and operate nuclear power stations, reprocess the used nuclear fuel and arrange safe storage/disposal of the high active waste, decommission the stations at the end of their life. I also want to see a competent independent nuclear inspectorate. I am appalled at what has happened and at the present situation. And very much doubt if the foregoing would be met.

Because of my past support for nuclear generated electricity and now my worries about Sizewell C I think I may be able to make more impact than the established anti-nuclear objectors.


I'll just put here what i'd say at the meeting, if i were actually brave enough to speak :-)

The trouble I have with new nuclear is that there is so much to it. I find it really hard to not go off on tangents when i'm looking into it as it’s all very involved and complex. The other problem is that there’s a lot about it that I don’t understand.

There are a couple of things that stand out for me. I saw in an announcement or report from maybe 2008 that a poll was taken on public support for new nuclear. There were about 1600 or so people asked, out of a population of however many million. From that amount of people it was decided to move forward with it (with other reasons too). I saw a newer poll recently which showed that joe public would rather have any of the various renewables rather than nuclear.

The first I heard about a new nuclear power station at Sizewell was when I received a letter from Therese Coffey about the proposed park and ride in Woodbridge. It’s just not public or common knowledge, and it should be. Consultation doesn’t seem to be a concern of the government, or the councils. They don’t consult properly, don’t disclose information, push schemes through with legislation that’s difficult to undo, then merely defend their position when challenged. I have no doubt that a lot gets through under the radar while folks are distracted with some hoohaa or other.  I keep hearing, or reading, that the government think that it is the minority who oppose new nuclear. I keep reading that the minority that do oppose are only thinking about traffic and parking issues.

I think that the government should be told how the residents of Sizewell and Leiston feel about a new power station at Sizewell. Is it possible for every house to be systematically surveyed to state categorically whether they support or reject?  If the government won’t engage with real people, why shouldn’t  we?


To consult with the public, they have to be informed and provided with the facts, and truths...something the government didn't do and would never do.  I think that all would be scandalised about many things eg. nuclear is an enormous cash cow for some; decommissioning costs; outrageous salaries; likely fuel price increases; how often incidents occur and what is not done about it; lack of evacuation procedure; sizewell owner's financial liability in event of accident; subsidies; tax issues; conflict of interest; on-site fuel storage;  safety; the truth about fukushima, etc.  I’m sure an enormous list of facts can be produced with everyone from this group’s input.  

Once local people know the facts, they can make an informed choice. I would hope that a majority would say no. We would know one way or the other for sure anyway. I would hope that people realise that they have enormous power when they stand together and can stop what they don’t want.  If that happened it could grow much bigger.


Would you email a copy of the petition please?  We have a mayday free music event this weekend in Ipswich so I will endeavour to get 100 signatures.  If 12 of us do that clearly we have enough to get the desired result.

 A good website is essential, plus all the other social media outlets we can use to connect with anyone involved.  I have a song called Radioactive which I feel we could harness and put to good use.  I’m hoping to get a chance to talk to one of my son’s who should be able to look at ways to make this work.  We may be able to link it to a way of generating some cash to help fund the group.  Are there any more camping protests in the pipeline?