What would you do Ma’am? Nanas plead with her Majesty on fracking

 

Image result for queen elizabeth ii

What would you do Ma’am?

The nanas headed by Tina Rothery have written to the queen asking here to intervene over the dangers of fracking. Clearly the nanas are very worried about the health threat of fracking as this photo shows. I have to say I am mystified why so many anti-frackers smoke which is terrible for your health.

Frackingsmoking

Dear Editors,

Please find below, an open letter to Her Majesty, The Queen, as the latest press release from Lancashire Nanas and residents against fracking, from Lancashire. The letter has also been sent by post to Buckingham Palace. This press release is part one of a two-part action that will culminate in a peaceful presence at Buckingham Palace on 27th September 2016.

PRESS RELEASE                         19th September 2016

Your Royal Highness,

An important note before you read on: I am writing this as a fellow grandmother and would ask that you consider my question from your obligation to defend your young and with your heart, rather than your crown.

We are a group of UK citizens who feel increasingly shut out of the decision that is soon to be made on shale gas extraction in Lancashire. It is a basic tenet of democracy that power should remain as close as possible to the people and not be concentrated in the hands of a few.

We have seen democracy in action in Lancashire, where the people said ‘No’ to fracking and both their borough and county councils agreed with them, and in their turn said ‘No’ to Cuadrilla’s planning applications to frack two sites in rural Fylde, Lancashire [1].

Cuadrilla appealed and a public inquiry was held earlier this year at which we – the residents – spent three weeks giving evidence. The planning inspector’s report has subsequently been submitted to Sajid Javid MP, the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, who will make a decision at the beginning of October.

The decision to refuse planning permission for fracking in Lancashire was local democracy in action. However, the government’s support for shale means that the power has been passed from Lancashire’s elected representatives to the hands of a few, who are interested in aiding the interests of big business, rather than the interests and health of the residents of Lancashire [2].

This is not democracy.

During the last five years we have spent a considerable amount of time, energy and money pursuing every democratic opening available to us. We have:

We have exhausted every democratic channel. We are desperate.

They seem to follow a different kind of democracy ………………

What would you do, Ma’am? [I suggest asking Prince Phillip what to do]

Yours sincerely,

Nanas & Residents

ENDS

For immediate release.

Notes to Editors:

  1. Fracking plans rejected: Lancashire council throws out Cuadrilla proposal
  1. Minister says he will have final say on Lancashire fracking plans
Advertisements

4 thoughts on “What would you do Ma’am? Nanas plead with her Majesty on fracking

  1. Garry

    Fracking has about a 0.04 in a million according to UC. Unfortunately they originally got it very wrong and made errors in their spreadsheet that put the cancer risk as higher than the EA safety level. The global anti fracking movement didn’t remain very objective about the study, as many health professionals did who questioned why it was so high when multiple other studies did not find the same. So the anti frackers used it in planning meetings as ‘evidence’ that fracking posed a high cancer risk. It is a classic example of bad science being jumped on by those with strong biases desperately seeking anything that might prove them right. Fortunately it is now corrected.

    http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/acs.est.6b02762

    Like

    Reply
    1. Garry

      Never start a comment and then get pulled away to work, and then come back to it again.. Fracking has a 0.04 in 1,000,000 chance of causing cancer according to the UC study. Smoking has around a 30% chance of causing a cancer over a lifetime.

      It is completely valid to note that these anti frackers are not representing science accurately (i.e., since they have been informed about the real science and have even seen regulators report it during planning meetings and they still choose to ignore it – lying) and they are lying to the public about a 0.04 in a million chance and saying they are really worried about that while maintaining personal drug addictions that have risks orders of magnitude higher and that (as per recent law changes to protect children in cars) if they are not very careful about how they go about these drug habits they will be personally putting people at much higher risk through secondary smoking and all of the very real dangers that some with this.

      Since these people have put themselves into the public sphere and are engaged in political activity it is very relevant to point out this hypocrisy, especially, as it is, based on pernicious misuse of bad science used to scare innocent people.

      Like

      Reply
  2. ian palmer

    It would be interesting to compare proposed fracking in Lancashire with actual fracking in Oklahoma. Although I have not finished studying the chemicals In fracking, my presentations do establish the following facts, based on data: (1) The fracs do NOT grow up into and contaminate aquifers.(2) the fracs do NOT cause the earthquakes. The earthquakes ARE caused by injecting wastewater too fast into disposal wells. Most of the wastewater is water produced along with oil or gas from shale wells. I am open to a factual discussion, based on data, with the Nana group. You can read more in my website http://www.IanDexterPalmer.com

    Like

    Reply

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s