10. Debate on NDM6813 — Disposal of dredged materials from the Bristol Channel

Part of the debate – in the Senedd at 5:16 pm on 10 October 2018.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Jenny Rathbone Jenny Rathbone Labour 5:16, 10 October 2018

No. No, I won't, thank you.

For applied marine and freshwater science. So, you have to understand that these are the go-to experts that UK Government, international governments, non-governmental organisations—. They are the people who understand this. And to indicate that they haven't tested for all the long list of metals that Caroline has listed is not credible, because, clearly, they were going to be looking for— [Interruption.] They were looking for—[Interruption.] They were looking for all these metals and they were unable to find them. There's no—. Unless they introduce these metals after the event, they can't possibly be seeing things that aren't there. 

Now, in response to Llyr as to why the Cardiff Grounds is being used, it's because it's environmentally the most sustainable place to dispose of it. Sending it all the way to the Thames, you know, expends resources that are not necessary. Cardiff Grounds is the go-to place for disposal of construction waste in this area, simply because it's on the estuary and the tide moves the material on. So, there's absolutely no reason at all why we should be disposing of it in Scotland, in the Thames, or anywhere else. This is the most environmentally appropriate place to be disposing of construction waste. I do not—[Interruption.] I do not understand: if, as Mike Hedges says, scientists don't make up results, then why would Cefas be making up the results when their international reputation would be at stake? I think it's completely not credible.