Nuclear power stations are not like coal or oil plants, or wind farms. They use uranium to make plutonium and a host of other radioactive wastes – and they have their own £100 million police force with 1,100 heavily armed officers.
The Civil Nuclear Constabulary is needed to stop terrorists, insiders or malcontents attacking, disrupting or stealing nuclear processes or materials. Radioactive waste could be made into a dirty bomb that could contaminate a city for generations. Intelligent insiders could turn any nuclear plant into a potential Chernobyl or Fukushima, and spray hazardous radioactivity across the country.
There are also risks of industrial espionage to help foreign powers with nuclear technology. The Chinese state power company keen to take a major stake in a new nuclear power station in southern England is facing spying charges in the US.
These are not threats to be taken lightly, and they require some serious policing. It’s therefore disturbing to learn, as we report today, that the civil nuclear police have reported 21 security breaches in the last year.
According to the police, the breaches are low risk, and have mostly been reported by those guilty of breaking the rules. That is not, however, entirely reassuring.
Are there breaches that no-one reports? Who has got their hands on lost or stolen police smart phones or identity cards? Who has seen the sensitive information that’s been emailed outwith secure systems? What problems are there that we don’t know about?
Politicians and campaigners are right to express concerns, and call for action. It is unclear exactly how much control the Scottish Government has, or even whether it is kept informed of security breaches.
Scottish ministers must pay attention to the dangers, and demand to know what’s been happening. They should make sure they are given explanations for all the incidents in Scotland, and check enough is being done.
In this day and age, the prospect of nuclear terrorism, sabotage or espionage is truly terrifying. We need to be as sure as possible that nuclear security is foolproof, or at least as foolproof as possible.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here