Dear Ministry of Defence,

During the British nuclear testing programme there were approximately 200 Servicemen billeted in the forward area known as 'C' Camp situated at 'B' site.

1. Could you please supply copies of all documents defining the purpose of billeting these men within the forward area?

2. Could you please supply all documents showing the precautions taken to ensure the health and safety of these men were not jeopardised in any way?

3. If there was any monitoring carried out to ensure the safety of the men involved, could you please supply copies of the results of this monitoring?

I look forward to reading your reply.

Yours faithfully,

Dave Whyte

Dear Ministry of Defence,

I have just realised I forgot to mention I am refering to Christmas Island in the above request regarding 'B' site.

I feel it is better to clarify now rather than later.

Yours faithfully,

Dave Whyte

Dear DES SEC-PolSecShips and Subs (MULTIUSER),

Thank you for your reply. I am refering to the months of August, September and October 1958 when members of 2 Troop 61 Fd Sqn were moved into the forward area known as 'B' site. 'B' site is shown on the maps of Christmas Island approx 15 miles South/East of 'C' site.

I trust this will enable you to retrieve the information requested.

Yours sincerely,

Dave Whyte

Dear DES SEC-PolSecShips and Subs (MULTIUSER),

Thank you for your reply. I have to admit, the prospect of labelling my enquiries as 'National Security' would leave me in no doubt that this action was being imposed in order to deny me access to the truth. I can see nothing in my questions that would be a risk to National Security.

Yours sincerely,

Dave Whyte

Dear DES SEC-PolSecShips and Subs (MULTIUSER),
Thank you for your reply, Reference 13 08 2012 155030 014. Your comment is noted: "s24 is believed to apply to some of the information requested." considering these were questions regarding events of over 50 years ago you only 'Believe!'

Can you please advise which question, or questions, you believe comes under s24? Can you also supply the answers to the questions that are not thought to come under s24? Once a decision has been reached on which answers are going to remain secret and hidden from nuclear veterans a further FOI may be required to discover the reasons why!
Yours sincerely,

Dave Whyte

Dear DES SEC-PolSecShips and Subs (MULTIUSER),
Your decision on whether to permit the release of information under the terms of the Freedom of Information act is still awaited. Reference 13-08-2012-155030-014.

Yours sincerely,

Dave Whyte

Dear DES SEC-PolSecShips and Subs (MULTIUSER),

As the reply to this Freedom of information request is now long overdue, I request an internal review to be carried out into the handling of my request.

Yours sincerely,

Dave Whyte

Dear DES SEC-PolSecShips and Subs (MULTIUSER),
Thank you for your reply. It is almost four months since this request was placed and it appears the Ministry of Defence are employing delaying tactics rather than answering straightforward questions. These events occurred over fifty years ago and there can be no reasons of National Security to withhold the information requested.

It is further noted, that no attempt has been made by the Ministry of Defence to answer the parts that do not fall under s24.

I look forward to receiving the answers to the questions not covered by s24.

Yours sincerely,

Dave Whyte

Dear DES SEC-PolSecShips and Subs (MULTIUSER),

Once again you have used the phrase 'qualified exemption s24(national security' is considered to apply to some of the information requested.

You state 'Some of the Information' yet you have not provided any of the information which does not come under S24.

Could you please expedite the information not affected by S24 as this is required as evidence for court.

Yours sincerely,

Dave Whyte

Dear DES SEC-PolSecShips and Subs (MULTIUSER),

Thank you for the less than helpful reply to my legitimate questions which were raised on the 11 August 2012,over five months ago. You have mentioned some items come under s24 (national security) but you have failed to state which questions come under that category and have also failed to produce the documents that do not come under that category. The only reason national security could be considered, regarding any of the questions raised, is to cover up the atrocities wilfully and deliberately committed against British Servicemen.
Yours sincerely,

Dave Whyte

Dear DES SEC-PolSecShips and Subs (MULTIUSER),

Thank you for your reply regarding some of the information may be regarded as s24 (national security) but you have failed to provide any of the information, requested on numerous occasions which you know does not come under s24.

By the time March 21 arrives this request will have been ongoing for over 7 months (well in excess of the 20 working days under the FOI Act).

Please expedite the information which does not come under s24.

Yours sincerely,

Dave Whyte

Dear DES SEC-PolSecShips and Subs (MULTIUSER),

Reference 13-08-2012-155030-014: For several months I have requested information not considered to come under s24 be expedited, but my request has been completely ignored in defiance of the terms laid down under the Freedom of Information Act 2000.
I therefore request an internal review be conducted into the handling of this case.

Yours sincerely,

Dave Whyte

Dear CIO-FOI-IR (MULTIUSER),

Thank you for your response to my request13-08-2012-155030-014 for an internal review into the handling of this FOI.
I believe the Ministry of Defence are in deliberate violation of the terms of the Freedom of Information Act in their attempt to withhold requested information. This has been done in the same manner as they deliberately violated all civilised rules relating to Health and Safety of 'Human Beings' when testing the nuclear weapons.

I will assume your reply institutes an internal investigation has been undertaken into the handling of this request and will act accordingly as per the FOI Act if the information is not forthcoming in two weeks time

Yours sincerely,

Dave Whyte

Dear DES SEC-PolSecShips and Subs (MULTIUSER),
Thank you for your rather belated answers to my questions regarding FOI 13-08-2012-155030-014.
1. You have stated that a substansive reply, or an update will be provided by 27 march 2013. This question was placed Eight Months ago and you have still to give a satisfactory answer. There can be no reason, other than contempt of the Freedom of Information Act for a delay of this magnitude.

2. The defiance of the Ministry of Defence again manifests itself in the refusal, even after numerous reminders, to supply this information. It now transpires the information requested is exempt under Section 21(1) (accessible by other means). I can see no reason why this information was not supplied when the enquiry was first made in August 2012.

3. You are right, I have requested this information on several occassions but it has never been supplied. The AWRE regularly took radiation levels at 'B' site where 200 Service Personnel were living in the radioactive forward area. As this was a medical experiment and these 200 Service personnel were 'Human Guinea Pigs' to discover the levels of radiation that are dangerous for a 'Human Being'. This information will be in the archives, data on these experiments would not have been destroyed. For over five years I attempted to obtain the radiation levels at ground zero after both Pennant and Burgee. You eventually called my requests 'Vexatious' and stated you did not have the information and did not know anyone who did. This was proven to be incorrect after the First Tier Tribunal in February 2012, when the information suddenly appeared and an apology was given.

The cost to the Tax Payer for an answer to an FOI Question will be several pounds but due to the intransigence of the Ministry of Defence, the requirement to place numerous requests before satisfactory answers are given runs the bill up to Thousands of pounds and wastes everyones time.

I do not believe this Freedom of Information request was handled in the manner subscribed by the Act.

I trust you will new look into this matter

Yours sincerely,

Dave Whyte

Dear DES SEC-PolSecShips and Subs (MULTIUSER),

Thank you for your reply to 13-08-2012-155030-014 which lists the information is available from the National Archives. The information given is totally misleading and does not answer the question as to why we were ordered to live in a radioactive zone.

The ROYAL ENGINEERS - 61 Fd Sqn is a diary of events (I have a copy for 1958), it tells the tasks that were performed and the troop movements, it does not give the reasons.

These men were used as 'Human Guinea Pigs,' and it is the reasons why they were used, and the true purpose for neglecting all health and safety rules by ordering them to live in this radioactive location that I am attempting to discover, and the Ministry of Defence is attempting to hide.

Yours sincerely,

Dave Whyte