I find it amusing which comments the moderator lets through, perhaps ones that support their & CN's views?

The idea of building an underground nuclear waste facility in the Lake District is a national disgrace. The argument that there will be financial benefits for the community are bogus-these arguments were made at every stage of Sellafield's development-just look at Cleator Moor, Egremont, Whitehaven, Maryport etc to see what benefits were gained. Even the Council Tax rates are high nationally yet the area can only be described as very deprived by any standards. The only little economic hope the western lakes has is from tourism which will be totally destroyed by this development. Further, what country what think of destroying it's most beautiful and uniquie environment with such a development?

@Me2 ".... don't claim to speak for the whole of Cumbria...."

Nowhere in my letter did I claim to speak for anyone other than myself, my reference to the people who work at Sellafield relates to statements in a Sellafield Workers Campaign document, and otherwise I was expressing my own opinion. However, your comment avoids the main point I was making, which is surely more relevant - that no-one, including the experts who wish to convince us to move ahead with the burial site process, knows the quantity or type of nuclear waste involved nor the level of threat involved. The process must be halted until that inventory is carried out - that's a matter of common sense and, for the Environment Agency and the local authorities a statutory duty-of-care issue.

Sarah, i beg to differ with you in that Sellafield employs not a single person from Keswick or Ambleside and local labour covers only the Copeland area. Yet 56,000 people are employed in the tourism industry here in the Lakes District and you are claiming a repository would not affect tourism which is laughable. it would be like advertising holidays at Drigg.

The reason Cumbria has to house this repository is that when it all goes wrong the death toll will be 100,000 deaths depending which way the wind is blowing.yet should the repository be housed in Kent or Essex the death toll would be several million leaving that county uninhabitable for several hundred years. Cumbrians are sleep walking to their doom.

Where has he been for the last two years? A deep storage dump is required, but it must be at the right place with safe geology. Mired has alreday studied West Cumbria and says there are much netter sites in other parts of Britain. so do a full test on those sites before the public of West Cumbria are forced to make a decision with the wrong information.

Rae & Andy, don't claim to speak for the whole of Cumbria. Unless you've asked the views of every person you're only speaking for yourselves.

The cheque is in the post mr hutton

if he wants it so bad why not bury it under his backyard, we don't want a nuclear waste dump anywhere near here, why not bury it under kent or essex? oh yeah they wouldn't allow it due to the fact it would be on london's doorstep

What Lord Hutton refers to as 'scaremongering' is actually the Cumbrian community raising valid concerns about a matter which will impact on future generations of Cumbrians and on the whole country. He deftly avoids the very embarrassing and critical gap in this whole process - that no-one knows how much or what nuclear waste needs to be dumped, no inventory has been conducted. Thus we are asked to make a decision based on information from an industry and government bodies which have failed over many years to take the basic precaution of maintaining records of what dangerous waste is stored in west Cumbria - even the people who work at Sellafield see that inventory as a priority. That the industry and regulators have so failed in basic safe practices should not fill us with confidence or trust in them now. It would be very foolish for the people of Cumbria to agree to an unknown quantity of waste of unknown risk to be buried in the land where their children and grandchildren will grow up and raise their families. On that basis alone the process is flawed - it is in the national interest that we should know exactly what nuclear waste exists before we rush to agree on a site for its disposal. I would have thought that, since this is a matter of public and environmental safety, the Office for Nuclear Regulation of the Environment Agency has a statutory responsibility to demand that this inventory is conducted without delay. There are many other issues of concern, but surely knowing the quantity and type and therefore understanding the risks and storage capacity involved is a first step - that's not scaremongering Lord Hutton, it's simply common sense, a quality in which, as you should know, the people of Cumbria do not lack.