I AM HORRIFIED by the US Senate鈥檚 refusal to ratify the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty
(快猫短视频, 6 November 1999, p 18). I asked defence
ministers how the British government had reacted to this bad news. Armed forces
minister John Spellar replied that Britain has expressed its disappointment both
privately and publicly. Prime Minister Tony Blair, German Chancellor Gerhardt
Schroeder and French President Jacques Chirac even voiced their disquiet in a
joint opinion article much publicised in the US.
But the Senate vote is not the end of the treaty, said Spellar. The US
Congress has agreed to fund the US contribution to the treaty鈥檚 International
Monitoring System during 2000. This should help discourage any further nuclear
testing.
As long as countries have nuclear weapons they have a responsibility to
maintain them to the highest standards of safety and reliability. Advances in
technology such as high-powered computers and the development of high-powered
lasers to study nuclear fusion will make a major contribution, according to
Spellar. Last summer, Lord Gilbert announced that Britain would invest in the US
National Ignition Facility, a proposed laser-fusion project, under a mutual
defence agreement. This would give Britain access to a high-powered laser, which
is a key element of our nuclear stewardship programme, the minister said.
Advertisement
Each nuclear weapon state has to reach its own conclusions regarding the
safety and reliability of its weapon stocks in the light of its own scientific
and technical capabilities and the characteristics of its weapons, Spellar said.
Under US constitutional procedures, the Senate has to satisfy itself on this
before consenting to US ratification of the treaty. The current view is that
American nuclear weapons can now be guaranteed without further testing, he
added.
Judging by the 1999 National Opinion Ballot Report, few Americans seem to
agree with the Senate. I hope that in time the Senate will reconsider the test
ban treaty and its many merits.
HOWARD STOATE, MP for Dartford, has tabled an early day motion to discuss
telecommunication masts. He believes that many people are worried about their
siting. And, according to the WHO, there is a lack of information on possible
long-term health risks from the microwaves they emit.
Stoate urges the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions,
local planning authorities and providers of mobile-phone networks to work
together to ensure that any extensions to these networks apply a 鈥渟equential
approach鈥� to the siting of masts. This means starting by sharing masts and using
existing buildings and structures where possible. He goes on to say that to be
on the safe side, telecommunications masts should be erected as far as possible
from schools and areas of high population density, and where they will create
the least visual and environmental impact.
By the end of this year, 50 per cent of the people in Britain are expected to
have mobile phones, so we should take Stoate鈥檚 concerns seriously.
