TNAG-1502-FCO40-2060-Guangdong-nuclear-power-station-project-at-Daya-Bay-safety-c-1986 — Page 101

P.11.

AUG 18 '86 15:05 TIB(00U) HK GOVT

•

10

A spokesman for the Government Secretariat told the paper that the Government had no intention of engaging another firm of consultants for the time being as the Government had already commissioned the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority (Harwell) to study the Daya Bay project.

In another report, the paper said it had learnt indirectly that a chief engineer at a nuclear plant in Britain had earlier told Legco member Martin Lee that the pressurised water reactor was very safe. But the engineer felt that China should not build nuclear power stations because it lacked experience in this field.

Ming Pao quoted an official of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission as saying that there was continuing controversy over the distance between nuclear plants and population centres. He declined to comment on the distance between the Daya Bay plant and HK, but he said personally he would not worry too much about population centres within 24-64 kilometres of nuclear plants. A similar report appeared in Ta Kung Pao.

The papers reported that the Legco delegation visiting the US would have a day-long meeting with officials of the NRC and other bodies today.

The press conference of a group of 113 people urging a scientific approach to the Daya Bay issue was covered by the media.

A spokesman, Kwan Lim-ho, said if the project met safety standards, they would support the construction of it.

Editorially, the HK Economic Journal said organisers of the signature campaign against the Daya Bay project were facing counter-publicity and were being dismissed as ignorant and having ulterior motives. This development was predictable because in undemocratic societies, mass movements could never match political power.

Ming Pao said the Daya Bay issue had become an emotive issue with campaigners against the project being labelled as organising political activities, causing a confrontation between HK and China, and having ulterior motives. The paper said the issue should be debated rationally and should not develop into a political confrontation. It noted that anti-Daya Bay campaigners were only doing so for the interests of HK,

and hence China.

Sing Pao welcomed the Government campaign on civic education and said this was necessary for the sake of a smooth changeover and for the development of representative government. The paper noted that the Government should also set up a nuclear education committee so that the public could make a rational assessment of the Daya Bay project.