To see messages related to this one, group messages by conversation.
To, june
Hotmail Active View
VID 20120824 00000
bollocks to wikileaks: war chemicals leak 2012 – s.o.s.- Oswaldtwistle part 1
Added on 26/08/2012

Dear Sir:

1. My name is Mrs. Charity Sweet and I presently live in Church Kirk which I understand is also classified as Oswaldtwistle. I am moving, in two weeks time, near a nature reserve, again in Oslwadtwistle, and will forward my postal details in due course.

2. Regarding ‘internet trolls’ and ‘keyboard warriors’, I would not worry yourself as you are being paid by the tax payer to deal with real, living and breathing human beings and communities of families.

3. Thank you for writing on my behalf to the Environmental Agency and I disagree that the language was OTT as it was  an honest response to the shock I was feeling at what I seeing, with my own eyes, at the Nook lane Cocker/Nipa WAR CHEMICAL PLANT site in the community of Oswaldtwistle.

4. I note that you have stated that the Lancashire Council have had “little to do with” “this”.
a) My first question is exactly what “little” bit have they done – what has been their role?
b) Has the Lancashire Council been privy to or instrumental in any licensing matters regarding Arthur Morgan’s land or Blakely’s?

5. To be perfectly blunt, it is the known and unknown toxic chemical pollutants that are grossly obvious and abundant on site that are my concern.
a) Why did the EA give permission and under what authority for Blakley’s to dig up known chemically contaminated rubbish and move it on?
b) Was the site recieving said chemically contaminated rubbish from Oswaldtwistle aware that it was toxic chemically contaminated household rubbish – key word toxic?
c) Did the site recieving said contaminated Ossie rubbish have the proper ‘status’/license to be legally allowed to dispose of said rubbish?

6. I have forwarded your email to June Smith as she has been the one doing the majority of the work in the community in bringing this issue to the forefront of public attention for the benefit of the entire community as well keeping the community up to speed on what is happening.

7. While I am pleased that the rubbish has been moved, not at the expense of the tax payer, I am somewhat alarmed that there has been not one precautionary measure placed in three weeks time on site regarding the presence of dangerous chemical contaminants and the obvious dangerous nature of two large open pits.
a) Can you please qualify and quantify exactly what health and safety regulations should be applied to such a site?
b) Can you please explain why no precautions have been taken, to date, to secure and signpost this chemically contaminated site?

8. As a mother I would presume that it would be normal practice to appropriately surround, seal off and signpost this dangerous site; especially in light of the properly controlled and exercised demolition currently happening on the land directly beside… it makes a rather stark contrast.

9. Since August 17, 2012, it’s been some three weeks time since Blakely’s left Arthur Morgan’s land in a right awful state and not even one warning or public notice sign?

10. Thank you for your time and due dilligence in these very important matters of what I reasonably conclude to be gross negligence of war chemicals and please pass on my questions and concerns, in response to your email, to Mr. Steve Molyneux at the EA.

11. I will respond to Steve’s response to my video in due course and look forward to your complete response to this email and my questions.


Mrs. C. Sweet

> From:
> To:
> CC:
> Subject: RE: cocker/ nipa sire – nook lane
> Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2012 08:39:32 +0000
> Hi,
> First of all it would be more helpful if you could provide a name and address. There has been a high increase in ‘keyboard warriors’ and ‘internet trolls’ who want to abuse people anonymously and make callous malicious claims so it is reassuring to know someone’s identity.
> I have written on your behalf to the Environment Agency and asked them to look at the video in which the language and tone was OTT. Lancashire County Council have had little to do with this as waste transfer; is a District Council matter (waste disposal & planning) and pollution is an EA issue. Your County Councillor is most likely to be Peter Britcliffe.
> Best regards
> Graham Jones MP
> Below is the response to your video that I have received;
> 28 August 2012 15:11
> Thanks Graham
> Although Blackley’s Waste has now been removed from the site, sadly it’s not the end of the Environment Agency’s or other regulatory organisations involvement here at Nook lane. The site remains a former chemical works and represents a hazard to both the environment and people. The video shows contaminated surface water associated with the historic use of the site and a number of more recent excavated areas. Information we are aware of following our inspections. I’ve looked through the video and there are an number of points to pick up and clarify. Most importantly, although the waste has been cleared the site is a formal chemical works, it remains hazardous and we would not wish that residents to be encouraged to enter for their own interest. The landowner may consider that this could be trespass also.
> Access to the site and the hazard represented by the excavated areas.
> This is a cause of concern and as a consequence the Health & Safety Executive (HSE) have served formal enforcement notices on the landowner, Lockgate Mount Ltd requiring them put in place measures to restrict access. I’ve copied Mike Sebastian (HSE principal inspector) into this email. The HSE lead on this issue and should be able to add more detail here.
> Contaminated water and site drainage
> Surface water on site is contaminated due to the sites former use as a chemical works (the black water). The Environment Agency has concerns that surface water management on site is poor and drainage from the site is reaching the local stream, Lottice brook. As a consequence we have put in place a sampling and monitoring regime to determine the risk the site presents to water in Lottice brook and requested that the Landowner Lockgate Mount Ltd improve the situation on site to protect the stream. We are still awaiting an action plan from the landowner, if this is not forthcoming we may serve formal enforcement notices.
> We are awaiting a full suite of results to determine the sites overall impact on the brook and currently talking with Hyndburn Council to determine if site should be designated as contaminated land.
> Please be rest assured that we take this matter seriously, however this is a complex site with a history of chemical production and associated contamination over decades. It is the landowners responsibility to ensure that people and the environment are protected. Nevertheless, we are not anticipating that all the issues associated with past contamination will be resolved quickly.
> I hope this answers the questions you have had following the video? If I can provide any more detail or assistance, or you wish to visit the site with our officers, please let me know.
> Best Regards
> Steve
> Steve Molyneux
> Environment Manager, Lancashire
> ________________________________
> From: Charity Sweet []
> Sent: 27 August 2012 15:08
> To: JONES, Graham
> Subject: cocker/ nipa sire – nook lane
> all problems have been satisfactorily resolved in Ossie? please watch the below video from on site as many many many others are now doing
> ________________________________
> UK Parliament Disclaimer:
> This e-mail is confidential to the intended recipient. If you have received it in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system. Any unauthorised use, disclosure, or copying is not permitted. This e-mail has been checked for viruses, but no liability is accepted for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this e-mail.

Country Views
United Kingdom FlagUnited Kingdom 685
United States FlagUnited States 52
Netherlands FlagNetherlands 21
Isle of Man FlagIsle of Man 14
Canada FlagCanada 12
India FlagIndia 10
Belgium FlagBelgium 9
Australia FlagAustralia 8
Switzerland FlagSwitzerland 7
Italy FlagItaly 6
France FlagFrance 5
Ireland FlagIreland 5
Romania FlagRomania 5
Portugal FlagPortugal 3
Malaysia FlagMalaysia 3
Germany FlagGermany 3
Sweden FlagSweden 3
Brazil FlagBrazil 3
Spain FlagSpain 3
Russian Federation FlagRussian Federation 2
Trinidad and Tobago FlagTrinidad and Tobago 2
Greece FlagGreece 2
Czech Republic FlagCzech Republic 1
Puerto Rico FlagPuerto Rico 1
Israel FlagIsrael 1
United Arab Emirates FlagUnited Arab Emirates 1

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: