|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Peaceful Protest
 Taking a Stand
|
|
|
| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
| |
Peaceful Protest
Taking a Stand
|
|
It is the high-profile anti-nuclear protests of the 1980s and 1990s which most people associate with Greenham Common, but for nearly half a century local residents have voiced their objections to many of the changes on the Commons.
|
| |
|
Even before the Commons were requisitioned as an airfield in 1941, Newbury Corporation (which had purchased the Lordship of the Manor in 1938) was being criticised for its stewardship of Greenham Common. An indignant letter to the Newbury Weekly News in that year claimed that Greenham "is now becoming a desolate waste and … a vast rubbish heap…Even a by-pass is threatened".
|
| |
|
With the ending of the Second World War in 1945, it was expected that the wartime airfield and the requisitioned common land would quickly be returned to their former use, and for a few years that seemed to be the case. But the Government's announcement in 1951 that the United States had requested permission to base heavy bombers in the UK pointed to a continuing requirement for the site. Go to Clouds of War - The Yanks are coming! to find out more about the reasons for this.
|
| |
|
At a public meeting on 22 March 1951, it was resolved to oppose the extension of the airfield: posters appeared warning of the "grave injury" to the town and the loss "now and forever" of ancient common land. Thousands signed a petition opposing the development, but to no avail. Even as the petition was being circulated, work was beginning to construct the longest military runway in Europe.
|
|
The turnery at Bury's Bank |
|
|
|
|
By 1954, when the airfield was fully operational, complaints about the noise of large low-flying aircraft were coming from many quarters: pupils at Greenham School "cringed" when the huge bombers passed just feet above them, whilst music and drama lessons at St. Gabriel's School, Sandleford, and lessons at the Wash Common Secondary Modern School (now Park House School) were disrupted.
|
| |
|
Local householders campaigned to have their rates reduced. For example, Foxhold, on the southern slopes of the Common, had had its rateable value reduced in 1952 as a consequence of the noise of construction.
|
| |
North front, Foxhold House, Greenham |
|
Now it was claimed that the airfield had diverted springs with the result that the well occasionally ran dry. Despite this and claims on behalf of other householders that "life is absolute hell" when the aircraft are flying, the rates were increased to their former level.
|
| |
|
|
|
Newbury's MP, Anthony Hurd, raised the issue of disturbance in Parliament, claiming that some Greenham homes were "almost uninhabitable", but despite all the voices of protest, flying at the base was to continue for a decade.
|
| |
|
Later protests were to prove more effective; in 1977 it was proposed to station USAF KC-135 tankers at Greenham. Both the Council and local residents were opposed to this, which would have meant a return to full time flying. The proximity of residential areas at Wash Common and Thatcham were given as reasons against the plans, as was the loss in property values. A proposal by the Ministry of Defence to build twenty-four aircraft shelters at Greenham fuelled fears that something was afoot. In the event they were not built, but local feeling against the tankers grew and by February 1978 an edition of the Newbury Weekly News carried a simple message in a logo designed by a local man: "Newbury Says NO".
|
| |
|
Coupled with the efforts of the pressure group 'Campaign Against the Re-Activation of Greenham Airbase', who organised a major letter writing campaign, local opposition appears to have been successful on this occasion. On 26 May 1978, the Under Secretary of State for Defence announced that the KC-135s would not be coming to Greenham, but would be stationed at Fairford in Gloucestershire instead. He gave as the main reason the proximity of the Atomic Weapons Research Establishment, but local people thought they knew better…
|
|
Report spells out airbase options |
|
|
|
Campaign poster - no KC-135 tankers for Greenham |
|
It was to be a short-lived victory, for within two years the Government was to announce plans with far greater consequences. The decision to station nuclear-armed cruise missiles at Greenham Common was to spark a level of protest few could have imagined. Go to Peaceful Protest - Embrace the Base to find out more.
|
| |
|
|
|
During the 1980s and 1990s, public awareness of the potential dangers of military operations had become much more acute. This was to give rise to a major local debate about the effects of two incidents in the 1950s which had passed almost unnoticed at the time. In 1996, the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND) leaked official documents which suggested that aircraft fires in 1957 and 1958 might have lead to releases of radiation. This raised fears that higher than expected levels of leukaemia in the Newbury region may have resulted from these incidents.
|
|
New figures confirm town cancer cluster |
|
|
|
'NO A-BOMB ON FIRE PLANE' |
|
The claim stemmed from a report which had been produced in 1961 by two scientists from the Atomic Weapons Research Establishment at Aldermaston. They had been sampling radiation levels in the area and had noticed that there were higher than expected levels around the runway at Greenham Common which extended in an "egg-timer" pattern beyond it. They initially speculated that this may have resulted from the dispersal of radiation from an aircraft fire in August 1957, but did not give any specific evidence to support the claim. Indeed, the scientists later pointed to the better-documented incident in February 1958 as the cause, when a B-47 carrying a nuclear weapon caught fire as the result of fuel tanks being jettisoned from another B-47.
|
| |
|
|
|
That there was in fact an incident in 1957 has never been conclusively proved, but it is known that Greenham Common airbase was closed for some weeks in the summer of 1957 due to an out break of Asian 'flu, which also affected about 2,000 people in Newbury. Perhaps that was the source of the confusion.
|
|
1957 fire at air base 'was more serious' |
|
|
|
Greenham B47 accident linked with Leukaemia cases |
|
By the middle of 1996, speculation was rife that a concentration of cases of leukaemia in line westwards of the Greenham Common runway may have been related to the 1958 incident. The case was vigorously pursued by the parents of a teenage girl who had died of a rare form of leukaemia in 1993.
|
| |
|
|
|
The campaigners - 250 of whom attended a public meeting in August 1996 - were supported by Newbury's MP David Rendel, who pursued the matter vigorously with the Ministry of Defence. In a reply to his questions, the MoD said that they could trace no reports or correspondence relating to the 1958 accident and that the US authorities confirmed that no nuclear weapons were involved. The MoD added that levels of radiation had not at any time been such as to present a risk to public health, but offered a further survey in the Greenham Common area by the National Radiological Protection Board.
|
| |
|
Dissatisfied with the official accounts, Newbury District Council commissioned its own radiological survey, carried out by Southampton University. Aerial and ground level samples were taken during August 1996 and the results published in February of the following year.
|
| |
|
The conclusion of the £250,000 study was that there were no raised levels of uranium or plutonium on or around the base. In effect, the town was given the "all clear". This was welcome news, not least because it removed an obstacle to Newbury District Council's plans to acquire the Commons following the closure of the air base. But it was little comfort to those families affected by leukaemia in Newbury, where cases were shown to be three times above the national average. Their campaign continued, but Greenham Common was no longer the prime suspect.
|
|
GREENHAM URANIUM HUNT IS ON |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
