Depleted Uranium (Hansard, 2 April 2003)

§ Mr. Ingram

I welcome this report which adds to the body of evidence on the environmental effects of Depleted Uranium (DU) ammunition. Officials have made a preliminary assessment of the main body of the report including the conclusions and recommendations. The findings of this study are consistent with previous United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) studies in Kosovo (2001) and in Serbia and Montenegro (2002). We note the UN EP assessment that the recorded contamination levels are very low and do not present immediate radioactive or toxic risks for the environment736W or human health. We note also that anecdotal reports of rises in cancers in the Balkans were not substantiated by the World Health Organisation (WHO) as part of this project. UNEP say that, WHO concludes that, due to the lack of a proper cancer registry and reporting system, claims of an increase in the rates of adverse health effects stemming from DU cannot be substantiated. The existing scientific data on Uranium and DU health effects indicate that it is highly unlikely that DU could be associated with any of the reported health problems".

We have stated previously that any DU contamination will be limited and localised and that actions to reduce any potential intakes will only be necessary in some extreme cases, and we note the findings of this report are consistent with that view. Specifically, the report concludes that DU contamination occurs at low levels, detectable with radiation monitors up to two metres around an impact at the surface, but also detectable in laboratory chemical analysis of soil up to 200 metres away in some cases. The report states that the corresponding radiological and toxicological risks from such low-level contamination are insignificant.

Where Depleted Uranium has been detected in air and water, it has still been within normal levels of naturally occurring Uranium. The concentrations are described as very low and the resulting radiation doses insignificant. The report recommends that further work is carried out on the corrosion and dispersion of DU in the soil and possible subsequent uptake by groundwater. The Ministry of Defence's independent research programme on DU, announced in March 2002, already includes such work.

We support the view that sensible pragmatic precautions should be taken to protect the civil population in areas where armed conflicts occurred and that these precautions should address all potential hazards. In particular UNEP has drawn attention to the fact that past ammunition production and current ammunition destruction activities have produced surface concentrations of heavy metals above levels at which precautions should be taken. The report also draws attention to the fact that industrial radiation sources present a greater health risk than DU contamination. UNEP makes recommendations to raise awareness, train personnel in decontamination, strengthen the radiation safety infrastructure and to investigate health claims. This will be achieved initially by improving data capture of health statistics, particularly with regard to cancer registration and to improving knowledge of basic epidemiology and interpretation of clinical findings in clinical staff. We support these recommendations. The press release on the UNEP website gives a good summary of the findings.