'Ghost ships' scrapping rejected

marin · 12 Oct 2006 at 16:30

Hartlepool council have just rejected the scrapping of the Ghost Ships that have been sitting here for years now.

Here we are losing jobs in this country, and here is a company prepared to invest and create jobs and they get knocked back every time by councillers who should take their heads out of their a****.

Before people start going on about toxic waste & asbestos, this is an area with a nuclear power station & a major chemical industry, I think we know how to deal with toxic waste - if there is any.

More likely that more jobs will go overseas, leaving us to become Disneyland UK.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/tees/6043166.stm

FTM · 12 Oct 2006 at 16:45

the mind boggles..it really does

in an old industrial area where jobs have gone missing for years..heres somebody who can provide jobs for local people who will have experience of working in heavy industry

yes there may be concerns about the contents of these ships...but at least here they would be dealt with safely and disposed of safely

instead these ships will end up in indonesia or india where they will be run aground on a beach..and dismantled by men, women and children with no protective clothing and any waste wil go straight into the local environment..so not really helping the planet in the long run eh? just so long as its not in my back yard..a similar situation is happening on the tyne...a chance for jobs knocked back by people who dont want to hear heavy industry at work from their back gardens

scorza · 12 Oct 2006 at 16:47

I wonder how much of it is to do with the fact that its ex US naval vessels? Like, if it was a Venezualan ship I bet they'd be welcoming its toxic hull with open arms.

Slinwagh · 12 Oct 2006 at 16:55

So are they just going to sit there and rot and casue god knows what damage when the answer was to dispose of them correctly.....

bigred · 12 Oct 2006 at 17:25

My dad (and indeed I) used to work for Able UK. The whole situation is beyond belief, the government interference is ridiculous.

Alex

Biohazard · 12 Oct 2006 at 17:28

I don't think they can argue the environmental case as I assume much work would be done in drydock no?

AmaTeX · 12 Oct 2006 at 18:05

Biohazard said:
I don't think they can argue the environmental case as I assume much work would be done in drydock no?

And also under stick health and safety guidelines such as COSHH etc.

Stringy · 12 Oct 2006 at 18:08

As has been said, if we don't dismantle them I hate to think who the next lowest bidder is. Real environmentally responsible 'not in my back yard' approach.

Von Smallhausen · 12 Oct 2006 at 18:25

scorza said:
I wonder how much of it is to do with the fact that its ex US naval vessels? Like, if it was a Venezualan ship I bet they'd be welcoming its toxic hull with open arms.