Antinuclear

Dutton’s devoid-of-details nuclear plan an atomic failure

By Belinda Jones | 25 May 2024  https://independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/duttons-devoid-of-details-nuclear-plan-an-atomic-failure,18632
Given the absence of substance in Peter Dutton’s nuclear policy so far, his ‘lack-of-details’ cry over The Voice must surely come back to haunt him, writes Belinda Jones.

TWO YEARS AGO, Nationals Leader David Littleproud called for a national discussion on nuclear energy.

Said Littleproud:

‘Peak business groups and unions are calling for the moratorium on nuclear power to be lifted, amid a push to ensure Australia is “technology agnostic” during its transition to cut emissions. It’s time to have the discussion.’

Almost two years later, neither Littleproud nor Dutton has yet produced anything of substance on the issue for the Australian public to consider — just broken promises and delays over when details on the Coalition’s nuclear energy policy will be delivered.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has called on the Coalition to release details on its nuclear energy policy.

Dutton’s level of preparedness for a discussion on nuclear energy appears only to have extended to a tweet at this stage.

Since taking over the nuclear conversation, Dutton has incurred the ire of the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), which was forced to defend its reporting in a “rare intervention”

In March 2024, Dutton made incorrect claims about Australia’s national science agency’s costings and slammed its GenCost 2023/24 report, prompting a warning from CSIRO chief executive Douglas Hilton that public trust requires our political leaders refrain from disparaging science.

In a telling statement this week, Member for Wannon Dan Tehan pledged his support for the Coalition’s nuclear energy policy — just not in his electorate. This may be the reason for Dutton’s delay in releasing the policy details: a divided party room.

To be fair, mainstream media has attempted to elicit answers from Dutton for months now, to no avail. The public’s desire for detail on the Coalition’s nuclear policy is becoming more pressing as both the 2024 Queensland State and 2025 Federal Elections loom.

IA contacted Peter Dutton to try to get some direct answers for our readers, asking the following questions:

In terms of transmission of nuclear energy, what changes to existing power grids and transmission systems will have to be made to accommodate nuclear reactors or SMRs? What will be the cost and timeframe of those changes?

How many nuclear reactors or small nuclear reactors (SMRs) does the Liberal/National Coalition want to build?

What will be the average cost per nuclear reactor and SMR?

What is the estimated date of nuclear reactors or SMRs being operational?

Where will the proposed nuclear reactors or SMRs be located?

In proposed nuclear reactor or SMR locations, what steps has the Coalition taken to consult with the local community, environmental agencies and other levels of government about the impacts of the proposed nuclear reactor or SMR, and are any details of those consultations available to the public?

Does the Coalition plan for nuclear include significant taxpayer investment? If so, how much?

What budget measures will have to be taken to free up funding for nuclear reactors or SMRs, that is, what cuts in other areas of the budget will have to be made?

How many short-term jobs will be created during the construction phase of each proposed nuclear reactor or SMR? Will those jobs be mainly local jobs or FIFO?

Traditionally, government support of a new enterprise/industry is conditional on the creation of secure, new, ongoing jobs. Given the fact nuclear reactors and SMRs will likely be fully automated requiring very few jobs when operational, what is the quid pro quo for government funding? Will taxpayer funding secure an equity stake in nuclear businesses in return for government support in lieu of a significant number of jobs?

How will the nuclear reactors or SMRs be cooled? Do the proposed locations have enough water to support a nuclear reactor or SMR, especially during drought? Please provide evidence to support your answer.

Will the Coalition’s proposed nuclear reactors or SMRs draw water from the Great Artesian Basin at any time? If so, how much and what will be the impact?

What is the Coalition’s plan for the nuclear waste generated by nuclear reactors and SMRs and the long-term site repatriation costs and timeframe of any proposed nuclear reactor or SMR site?

What business groups, individual persons or businesses, or private investors have expressed interest to the Coalition in building nuclear reactors or SMRs? And what is the current estimate in dollar terms of that interest?

Are any of those business groups, individual persons or businesses, or private investors already invested in other industries associated with nuclear energy, such as mining and resources?

Two hours later we received a curt reply stating, ‘… we will announce further detail regarding our energy policy in due course’.  

The email also suggested IA “continues its own research”.

This reply from Dutton’s office is wholly unsatisfactory, so IA will continue seeking answers from the Coalition to these important questions — answers that our readers have a right to know – until we get a more informative response. After all, it was the Coalition that called for a conversation on nuclear energy in the first place and its “plan” is to implement a nuclear policy if it wins office in less than 12 months.

Time is running out for Dutton to present his nuclear energy policy — important electoral dates approach.

But, clearly, the Coalition’s behaviour around the much-awaited policy details indicates how totally unprepared it is to hold government. It wants to lead the conversation and the country, yet it hasn’t put in the work. After almost two years of “discussion”, the Opposition still comes to the table empty-handed — no information, no plan, just a series of thought bubbles and meaningless L-NP talking points. 

Dutton’s words –“When you deliberately keep the detail back, people become suspicious” – will no doubt come back to haunt him. Because when it comes to the Coalition’s nuclear energy policy — if Australians don’t know, they’ll vote no.

May 25, 2024 - Posted by Christina Macpherson | politics