Film Badges - 1958

A lot has been written over many years about film badges and their issuing of them to the participants in Nuclear Testing. But who made the decision not to issue everyone with film badges on Christmas Island? This memo dated the 2nd of July 1958 to R Pilgrim Esq of AWRE may answer that very question.

It starts:

"Should film badges be issued to those serving at Christmas Island?"

"It has not thought to be necessary to issue film badges to date. Since radioactivity and contamination at the Island may occur in certain areas the policy has been to define these areas and control entry and exit thereto"

It also states:

"These personnel have been given appropriate medical

examinations (blood count) and are provided with film badges"

Yet these blood counts are missing from the medical records of the personnel who have requested them, the MoD deny they exist, yet evidence shows that they do exist, they have just been suppressed from the participants.

It also states that the island is not subject to contamination or radioactivity:

"The remainder of the Island is not subject to contamination or radioactivity. However, as a wise insurance policy, counts are taken in all areas to ensure that backgrounds remain within limits. In lay language the count could be regarded a communal film badge"

How can a count taken in an area be used as a communal film badge to measure the contamination received by the servicemen and the indigenous people, many of who moved around the island and were moved closer to the detonation during the firing?

When balloon-supported firings were discussed, should film badges be issued to everyone was an issue that needed a decision to be made:

"As we are now, for the first time, about to undertake balloon-supported firings at Christmas Island, health physics for all of the Island comes under fresh examination in view of the possible differences between this type of firing and the high altitude air burst from the general radio-activity and contamination aspect. First thoughts suggest issue of film badges to all personnel"

So why was everyone not issued a film badge if there was any possibility of contamination occurring?

"Further examination however, indicates the wisdom of this policy to be questionable to say the least"

But why is it questionable, surely the safety of everyone on the island was paramount, and the health and safety of everyone involved was taken into consideration at all times according to the Ministry of Defence.

"If all personnel are to be issued with film badges, natives, both female and children, civilian merchant navy men in merchant ships and those in a similar category at the Island will have to be included."

Well of course they would have to be, anyone who has the potential to be contaminated would have to be monitored wouldn't they, health and safety would require it.

"The administrative task (which of course must be met if essential) is considerable bearing in mind that the badge has to be issued, a record kept and the badge rechecked subsequent to examination for contamination after the holder has left the island. Issue of badges at this stage may well provoke anxiety."

Anxiety! No mention of the fact that their islands had been effectively invaded, the landscape changed forever, contaminated, and the ecosystems destroyed. But not to worry about the devastation or the contamination, if we give them a badge it may provoke anxiety. It is unbelievable.

"What right do we to subject native populations and civilians to the

possibility of contamination, which however remote, the issue of a badge to individuals would suggest is a likely possibility?"

Exactly, what right did the UK Government have to subject their servicemen, civilians, and the native populations to the possibility of contamination? None, the testing program caused so much devastation and left a legacy for thousands of years to come.

"Why should our present system of controlled areas not be extended

to cover the requirements of balloon-supported firings?

Would this be adequate and safe?"

So to stop the anxiety, stop the administration and save money on issuing film badges why not just extend the controlled areas, then everything will seem safe. Obviously not!

"First consideration of a film badge issue was provoked by the lego-medical aspect of disability claims. A case is about to start and there may be some difficulty in defending such claims."

So now the truth, if we issue film badges to everyone and record the results, then any claim will be difficult to defend. But if no film badges are issued, then defending the claim will be made easier as there will be no evidence to support the claim. Better to extend the areas and not issue everyone with a badge.

Conclusion

In 1958 the UK Government was already considering the implications of disability claims and if they issued film badges to everyone, it would be harder to defend such claims, and they have been proven right. Approximately 90% of all War Pension claims by nuclear veterans have been denied, this is down mainly down to the lack of evidence of exposure as there are no readings for many personnel.

So even after this decision was made for monetary reasons, not health and safety reasons, the decision was made to remove the native population from the island during testing. Yet this memo states that if they are not in an extended area, then they will be safe, so why were they removed during testing and the servicemen remained?

Because of the large administration task of issuing and recording film badges and the possibility that the readings could be used for disability claims, they were not issued to everyone involved in the tests. It had nothing to do with health and safety, nothing about protecting the servicemen, the civilians, and the native population, just the fact that the admin was too much and they would possibly get claims in the future that they would be unable to defend.

64 years ago the UK Government was already concerned with claims, they decided not to record potentially harmful doses of radiation, they knew the risks, continued to test and put everyone involved at potential risk, and have denied all responsibility since.

The UK Government didn't want to raise the anxiety levels amongst the participants and they definitely do not want to pay any compensation to them. Hiding their blood counts and not providing them at any cost, diluting the meter readings, and giving an average using communal readings then denying any wrongdoing. After all, they discussed it and decided it was safe, this will be enough to deny any responsibility.

Time to end the denial