I saw the BBC Breakfast news this morning. I really should refrain, it does my blood pressure no good whatsoever. The story today that caught my attention was the vexed problem of energy – in this instance, nuclear power. Now, I’m ambivalent about the issue. Having worked briefly in the industry during the eighties, I was struck by the apparent lack of foresight regarding de-commissioning at the time, but that seems to have risen to the top of the agenda these days. As far as risks go, the matter of them blowing up and polluting the planet is getting somewhat hysterical. The biggest risks will tend to be around waste management and de-commissioning; not to mention some reassurance on build costs. We then had Michael Meacher interviewed for a “no” camp sound-bite. In it, he mentioned terrorism. Oh my fucking god, they always do it, don’t they? Is it possible for a politician these days to make any statement without ranking up the climate of fear and trying to make us live like cowering wrecks waiting for them to rescue us from our nightmares? The likelihood of a terrorist blowing up a reactor is miniscule compared with other real risks such as those mentioned. But, no, we’ve got to get the word “terrorism” in somewhere, haven’t we?
I was having my usual Victor Meldrew rant discussing this with Mrs Longrider who was equally annoyed by such blatant scaremongering and she mentioned the other great truth about inane sound-bites. If you can get the word “children” in, no matter how irrelevant to the subject under discussion, then you automatically get to score brownie points. Everyone nods sagely and repeats the mantra “oh, yes, we must consider the children”. It is meaningless but makes both politicians and news presenters look caring and wise (in their opinion anyway). Well, child terrorists must make a spin doctor’s day, then. :devil: