Was it right to detonate the Exeter bomb - and who is supporting those still affected?

Some people are still waiting for repairs with others expecting to be out of their homes for months after the detonation on February 27th. Many of the properties affected now face increased insurance premiums which the local MP says is 'unfair'.

The Government has also confirmed that a report into the decisions made for the method of detonation chosen will not be made public - after Exeter MP Ben Bradshaw asked if a less damaging course of action could have been followed.

Around 2.600 properties were evacuated, including 1.400 students from Exeter University accommodation, before the 1,000kg German bomb was detonated. A care home has also had to relocate residents as a result of the blast.

Hundreds of tonnes of sand were placed around the bomb and a special structure was built to contain the blast - but nearby buildings were damaged by the explosion and subsequent shrapnel.

Below, Exeter MP Ben Bradshaw's full interview with reporter Andrew Kay

When asked by Exeter MP Ben Bradshaw, the junior Armed Forces Minister James Heappey said: "The provision of Government financial assistance to compensate people affected by damage associated with domestic Explosive Ordnance Disposal activity is a matter for the Home Office to consider and address."

When the MP asked the Home Office he was told: "In cases such as this, the expectation is for costs to be met by private insurance. Communication channels for the public were set up through both the County and City Councils, and members of the public impacted by this incident were urged to go through those channels.

"The Home Office does not routinely provide briefing when such instances occur. We would expect the local Council to keep residents and businesses updated. The HO does not consider it is liable for any damage caused. It is not for the Home Office to intervene in disputes between insurers and their clients, therefore it would not be appropriate for us to comment."

Greatest Hits Radio has contacted The Home Office for a direct statement which is yet to be received.

When asked why details of the controlled explosion methodology have not been made public, Mr Heappey said: "In his response to your letter of 5 March, the Secretary of State described how due to the procedurally sensitive and classified nature of Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) incident reports, they are not routinely shared beyond operational partners.

"Publishing our render safe tactics, techniques and procedures is information that should not be made publicly available and accessible to those who might use it to mitigate our capability."

Below, our report from March 2 as the first people were allowed back to inspect the damage

Mr Bradshaw also asked the Secretary of State for Defence 'what alternative methods were considered for the disposal of the bomb recently unearthed in Exeter?'

Mr Heappey responded with: "In his response to your letter of the 5 March, the Secretary of State described that whilst we do not comment on the specifics of render safe procedures (RSP) or methodology, we can confirm that the full range of RSP options were considered by the Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) team operators and their respective chain of command.."

• exeter bomb
• exeter bomb compemsation