We are so close to a nuclear disaster it is shocking, and yet everybody is accepting the risk to the public."

SNP MP for Faslane base calls on defence secretary to investigate William McNeilly’s ‘extremely worrying’ allegations of security and safety failings

The defence secretary, Michael Fallon, has been urged to investigate a catalogue of alleged security failings around the Trident nuclear programme exposed by a Royal Navy whistleblower.

Brendan O’Hara, the Scottish National party MP for Argyll and Bute, which includes the Faslane submarine base, said that the security lapses described by Able Seaman William McNeilly appeared to be “extremely worrying” and merited further investigation.

O’Hara told the Guardian: “As an SNP MP implacably opposed to Trident but also as the local MP, I am extremely worried by these allegations, even if only half of what the report claims is true. The issue of safety is absolutely paramount, especially when the base is so close to a major centre of population.”

The newly elected MP added that he would write to Fallon to demand an investigation into the allegations, which he said “appear to confirm many concerns that have already been reported”, including those raised by the SNP Westminster leader, Angus Robertson, in a number of written questions in the Commons.

The MP spoke as a second Royal Navy whistleblower came forward to warn of security lapses in the service, saying that he found the allegations made by McNeilly to be persuasive.

The police and the navy launched a hunt for McNeilly, 25, when he went absent without leave from the Faslane naval base last week after publishing his report, The Nuclear Secrets, online.

In the 18-page dossier, McNeilly claimed that it was more difficult to get into some nightclubs than to gain access to Britain’s nuclear programme facility. Referring to a chronic shortage of personnel, he suggested that it was “a matter of time before we’re infiltrated by a psychopath or a terrorist”.

McNeilly said he was preparing to hand himself in to police on Monday afternoon after being on the run since last week. In a Facebook statement posted on Monday morning he told supporters: “There’s nothing I can do from prison; whatever happens now is up to you and the government.”

On Monday a former Royal Navy communications and information technology specialist said that McNeilly’s actions inspired him to speak out for the first time about the security lapses he saw while serving.

Euan Bryson, 25, told the Guardian that McNeilly’s concerns about security breaches “rang true from my experience”. He described how a shipmate routinely used a blue bank card to get past security into his base after losing his Royal Navy identity card on a night out.

Bryson, who served on HMS Ark Royal and HMS Illustrious and was based at Faslane before leaving the service in 2013, said there were “manning issues” across the board meaning that relatively junior employees were often tasked to do jobs they did not have the security training or clearance to carry out.

“I made my thoughts clear when I served, including when I handed in my resignation notice. The chain of command system has failed. If McNeilly felt ignored what other option did he have? You join to serve the country but if you feel your job is not serving it then you have an option to speak out.”

But, as the Ministry of Defence launched its own investigation into the allegations, senior members of the Royal Navy community sought to cast doubt on McNeilly’s claims. Peter Roberts, a former Royal Navy warfare officer who retired last year after 23 years’ service, said the report contained a number of basic factual errors, from McNeilly’s use of jargon to the safe diving level for submarines.

“Most of his claims about on board the submarines are factually incorrect and there’s a degree of sensationalism. For that reason I can’t place too much weight on it,” he said.

Roberts, who is now a senior researcher at the Royal United Services Institute thinktank, said he did not think the allegations warranted a high-level Ministry of Defence investigation but that a local inquiry into security at Faslane may be necessary.

McNeilly, a newly qualified engineer from Newtonabbey near Belfast, now faces a substantial jail term if he is prosecuted under the Official Secrets Act 1989.

An online petition against his prosecution has amassed more than 1,500 signatories since it was launched on Sunday.

Dee McLoughlin, who grew up with McNeilly in Newtonabbey, insisted that his friend was “not the type to make things up”. McLoughlin told the Guardian: “He’s a pretty leval-headed person and I know how much he loved his job in the navy. I honestly couldn’t see him throwing it away unless it was for a good reason.”

McNeilly, who said he was on patrol with HMS Victorious from January to April, accused navy bosses of covering up a collision between HMS Vanguard and a French submarine in the Atlantic Ocean in February 2009.

At the time, MoD officials played down the incident and said the Vanguard had sustained only “scrapes”. But McNeilly said in his report that a navy chief who was on board at the time told him afterwards: “We thought, this is it – we’re all going to die.”

The more senior submariner allegedly told McNeilly that the French vessel “took a massive chunk out of the front of HMS Vanguard” and grazed the side of the boat. Bottles of high-pressured air came loose in the collision, he claimed, and the British submarine had to return slowly to Faslane to prevent them from exploding.

McNeilly went on to describe how HMS Vanguard’s missile compartment doubled up as a gym, leading to potentially disastrous mishaps when seamen dropped weights near the boat’s missile firing system.

He said he raised these and other concerns through the chain of command on multiple occasions, but that “not once did someone even attempt to make a change”.

MoD officials sought to downplay the allegations on Monday. A Royal Navy spokeswoman said the service disagreed with McNeilly’s assessment and described the report as containing “a number of subjective and unsubstantiated personal views”.

But in his Facebook statement, McNeilly countered: “Responding by downplaying a report because there’s lack of seniority, acting like your security system is impenetrable and your aged system is still in excellent condition for sailing, is not an adequate response.”

He explained that he had moved between countries and changed location every day since going on the run, but that he now “lacks the resources to remain undercover”.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/may/18/fallon-urged-act-whistleblowers-claims-trident-nuclear-subs?CMP=share_btn_tw

You can read his original statement here:

https://wikileaks.org/trident-safety/


If half of what he said is true I would hate to be living anywhere near it, perhaps that is why they were so desperate for Scotland to stay, somewhere to park it?

I imagine many sane people would hate to be lining in scotlandlandshire under the SNP.

It seems people don't mind Trident having a nuclear disaster, providing it's docked beside a heavily populated town in Scotland.

The 'headline' is taken from the second link, and is in the whistleblowers report.