There has been a lot of discussion in the United States about how the ‘terror threat’ legitimizes a new sense of secrecy.

Paul Orum, of the US NGO Working Group on Community Right-to-Know, has offered some thoughts on the arguments and alternatives.  As Paul says, "What you don't have can't explode".

News Coverage of the Chemical Security Act

Chemical Security Act Information

Maureen Butter's news is very bad from the point of view of the Pollutant Release and Transfer Register discussions.  We have been pushing for "storage" as an item for the PRTR, and always feared that September 11 would harden resistance to this. On the other hand, events like the Baia Mare cyanide spill and the Dutch fireworks explosion ought to act as a push towards improving information. But it is looking difficult.

Mary

Mary Taylor

Friends of the Earth

London N1 7JQ

Storage of dangerous materials, in our view, belongs to the peoples' right to know. We thought that Aarhus would end the secrecy around permits, with tanks and warehouses full of potentially dangerous materials in or near residential areas. But no! Our government just introduced a new law, making storage of such materials from now on a secret affair, because of 'security reasons'. Any great ideas, how to deal with that?

  Dr M.E.Butter

  Science Shop for Biology

  University of Groningen

  P.O.Box 14  9750 AA  Haren

  Netherlands