Antinuclear

Australian news, and some related international items

China’s Retaliation: when will it happen?

And more appropriately, what form will it take?

Jerrys take on China, Feb 18, 2026, https://jerrygrey2002.substack.com/p/chinas-retaliation-when-will-it-happen?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=1744413&post_id=188346536&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=ln98x&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

A few comments about why China is like it is – first of all, in the last 45 years, there has been no invasions, despite what people like little Marco Rubio of the US and Richard Marles the Australian Defence Minister might say, China is not and does not pose a threat to any of these countries – Japan might think there is a threat, China does not agree, in fact the opposite is true, Japan poses a much larger threat to China than China has ever posed to Japan.

China is concerned about, and in fact does feel threatened by Japan’s military expansion because the last time it happened literally millions of Chinese were murdered by the Japanese. Australia’s defence minister, Marles, asks us to consider why China has the world’s largest military expansion but he’s wrong – we have to hope he’s wrong because he’s been misinformed and is too dim to check out for himself, but more likely he knows he’s lying about this as China spends considerably less money than the US, in terms of not only its population but its geographical size, it’s quite entitled to spend more cash, when on a per capita basis, the amount is tiny compared to the US, on a ratio to GDP, it’s smaller than the US, it’s one third or less than NATO has been required to spend in terms of percentage of GDP and there’s one more very important factor that the US with only two neighbouring countries doesn’t have – that is 14 neighbouring countries with a shared land border.

Here’s another thing. China was invaded when they were weak, the British did it, the Americans did it, the eight nations alliance did it, Britain carved up part of Burma and took away some of China, it carved up India and took away parts of China, the Russians carved up Mongolia and Heilongjiang, taking away parts of China, the Japanese invaded and occupied China for 14 years. The classic twists and mental gymnastics people like Marles make would have us believe that the hundreds of US bases around China are to prevent China from doing what they’ve NEVER done – going out to invade other countries.

He, and several pundits would like us all to believe is that the US is keeping the world safe from China by arming their neighbours, interfering in the Provinces, Regions and the SARs but the reality is, China is building a military that will defend Chinese people inside China and Chinese land that belongs to China now – it’s not looking to reclaim land back, except in disputed regions.

Those disputed regions include parts of Tibet that the British took away and gave to India, parts of the South China Seas that the Japanese took away and both the US and UK, at the end of the Second World War, agreed would come back to China. There’s one military base in Africa, which is in a region shared with many other countries, including the USA, Japan, France, Italy, Germany Spain and even Saudi Arabia. Taiwan is NOT one of these disputed regions – the entire world whether they recognise Beijing or Taipei as the capital, recognises that there is one China and Taiwan is part of it – anyone who suggests that Taiwan is a country is either a liar, deliberately misleading us, or is far too dim to read the Constitution of the Republic of China, which not only claims all of the Chinese Mainland, it also wants those disputed regions back too.

China has something else which its detractors hate to admit and will lie about – that’s a policy of non-interference in the affairs of a sovereign nation – when it invests in another nation, it doesn’t call for democracy or elections, it doesn’t even ask that Communism or Socialism are accepted, it doesn’t send military to protect its assets, it won’t send missionaries to convert their subjects and it won’t impose conditions that force countries to give up their national assets or utilities if they can’t make the payments – if that sounds familiar and if it’s because you’ve been hearing that China will do all of those things and, if you think they have, I’d implore you to find me an example of where it’s happened, outside of opinion pieces written by people who want you to believe they have, almost every incident where we can find any of these things alleged, will be speculative – they’ll tell us what China might do, what China could do, what China may be doing, is alleged to have done or suspected to be involved in.

We might find individual cases of rogue Chinese people, Chinese criminals even and they use these tiny individual examples to tell you that this is “what China does” when that person who has broken the law has usually already been punished by the time they report it in western media and, if they mention that at all, it’ll be after the third paragraph where most of us have stopped reading.

On the other hand, I can find literally hundreds of examples where the USA is doing these things, where the UK and France have done these things, where Germany, Belgium, even Spain and Portugal have done them.

So then some of the comments I have been getting relate to the Port in Darwin, the ports in Panama and the Pirelli saga in Italy. Just for some background here, Sinochem owns 37% of Pirelli, the big Italian tyre company which wants to expand into the USA, of course the US won’t allow that while China has such a controlling interest. The share of Sinochem hasn’t changed, the only change is that the board, and remember Sinochem had controlling interest being the largest single shareholder, has declared that Sinochem no longer has control, giving the board more autonomy, – Sinochem agreed to this, so this isn’t a situation where anything has been taken from China, merely an agreement that the board retains control which a Chinese corporation retains more shares.

Erich, one of my followers said this: “if China doesn’t protect its assets it will lose them like Pirelli in Italy, the Ports in Panama, etc. Maybe at some point China will start caring about these things.”

My response is that it’s not just Erich, it’s literally hundreds of people, probably thousands but many in my responses who are misunderstanding China. China cares very deeply about the assets its people and corporations invest in, particularly overseas, but it will not break international laws, or contractual Agreements in order to protect them from people or governments which do break laws.


China will react to this in the same way it reacts to every other illegal action against it, by negotiations, and where they fail, arbitration, it will, when all else fails, take the appropriate legal action, which might be appeals to the WTO and perhaps even the UN or more likely the local courts – it knows there will be no satisfaction from those appeals but they are the legal mechanisms open to Chinese corporation. China as a government participates in legal and lawful bodies and does not want to overthrow them, to do so, makes China another USA – so the actions China takes, which will definitely be retaliatory, will be legal, they can, and probably will reduce purchases from offending countries, and of course, they will be much more careful in the decisions when investing in those countries both of which are well within their legal rights.

What China will not do is: unilaterally sanction anyone, any country or even any organisation within the country, it will not militarily defend its assets, it will not interfere in the internal affairs of another country but there is no doubt in my mind that if any country persists and acts on threats to China’s investments, there will be repercussions, probably it’s best not to call them retaliations, they are simply normal responses to a situation of risk.

In Australia for example, if they persist with this challenge to the legal investments Landbridge has made, investments that are compliant in every way and even beneficial to the people of the Northern Territory in jobs and payroll taxes, as well as increased business going through it’s port and beneficial to the people of Australia in 4.5 million income tax paid last year, those are the people who will suffer – China will find other suppliers for the things Australia sends – so far, the only one which is not directly sourced elsewhere is iron ore and, if China stops buying that in any great quantity, it will kill Australia’s economy.

Just continuing to use Darwin Port as an example, it is a critical trade hub in Northern Australia, handling minerals, agriculture, and livestock, with 2,295 vessel visits recorded in 2024-25, marking a 31.07% increase on the previous year. Darwin serves as a key gateway to Asia, managing significant exports of manganese, titanium, iron ore, and livestock. Given that China is the major trading partner of Australia, a huge proportion, unfortunately, there’s no way I can find out, would be Chinese owned, flagged, operated or destined ships, they would be travelling between China and Darwin – that’s 44 ships a week, many of which will simply divert to other ports, or, if the asset has been seized they’re more likely to simply stop coming altogether – how can that possibly benefit the warehouses, the truckers, the waste management, the catering and hospitality venues that the sailors use, the customs brokers, the security and surveillance companies – there’s an entire eco-system of industries deriving their income from a well-operated port and Darwin, which is a small city will feel a very heavy impact from no Chinese ships arriving and departing there. There will also be a lot of farmers, miners and other suppliers using that port to ship to China – it will all stop.

So, to think China will just sit back and do nothing is wrong, they are very mindful that their investments are not just at risk but under threat – business leaders in China understand this and are already taking action – there’s an April 2024 KPMG report, that’s almost 2 years old now showing that China’s investments in Australia have declined from a peak in 2016, just after the Free Trade Agreement was signed to the lowest level since 2006. It’s well worth a read if you’re interested, the report defines all kinds of factors but fails to mention the obvious one – Australia simply doesn’t want Chinese investment, they feel threatened by perceptions given to them by media which are completely false.

In keeping with the maxim that one person’s loss is another’s gain, the vast majority of China’s Overseas Direct Investment is now going to One Belt One Road countries – these are safe destinations, they are countries that welcome trade with and investments from China. In the Western world, that’s not many countries. Leaders of Canada and the UK were recently in China seeking investment opportunities, in both cases, they returned to their home countries to media criticism. It remains to be seen how they will handle this but they, as leaders, and their business leaders all know the truth – the media is lying, a few politicians who are actually paid by Washington to further lie about China are losing influence. Some people will assume that I’m either exaggerating about this but the reality is there for all to see, if you don’t believe me, go look up who are the main funders of the Inter Parliamentary Alliance on China (IPAC). It states clearly on its website that it does not accept funds from governments. But then lists the Taiwan Foundation for Democracy, the National Endowment for Democracy, the International Republican movement, Hello Taiwan the National Democratic Institute and others, all of which are government funded and almost all of which can trace their funds back to Washington DC and congressionally approved expenditure.

The vast majority of the Non-US aligned world realises – there is no threat from China and, once again I reiterate something I’ve said many times, the people telling you China is a threat are more likely to damage your economy and your global standing than China ever will – China isn’t a threat, it’s those people telling you it is, who are.

February 21, 2026 Posted by | politics international | Leave a comment

The challenges in projecting future global sea levels

It is well understood that human-caused climate change is causing sea
levels to rise around the world. Since 1901, global sea levels have risen
by at least 20cm – accelerating from around 1mm a year for much of the
20th century to 4mm a year over 2006-18.

Sea level rise has significant
environmental and social consequences, including coastal erosion, damage to
buildings and transport infrastructure, loss of livelihoods and ecosystems.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has said it is
“virtually certain” that sea level will continue to rise during the
current century and beyond.

But what is less clear is exactly how quickly
sea levels could climb over the coming decades. This is largely due to
challenges in calculating the rate at which land ice in Antarctica – the
world’s largest store of frozen freshwater – could melt. In this
article, we unpack some of the reasons why projecting the speed and scale
of future sea level rise is difficult.

 Carbon Brief 17th Feb 2026, https://www.carbonbrief.org/guest-post-the-challenges-in-projecting-future-global-sea-levels/

February 21, 2026 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Radiation Protection -worker and public health protection standards at risk.

The Military Connection
For Australian workers and the public, the situation is complicated by and made more
urgent as a result of the Australia, UK, USA (AUKUS) agreement regarding the building and
stationing of nuclear-powered submarines in Australia. We have already seen the creation
of a separate Australian Naval Nuclear Power Standards Regulator (ANNPSR) that will be
responsible for all standards in the construction, operation, maintenance, decommissioning,
and radioactive waste management from the submarines built or stationed here. We can
expect pressure from the USA to have these standards align with those in the USA. As such
the ANNPSR could become a back door for pressuring the current standards agency
ARPANSA to revise and weaken rather than tighten protection standards across the full
range of other occupational and public radiation health risks.

Radiation Protection Standards
For most of the past century national and international standards agencies have regulated
radiation protection based on three fundamental principles.


1 A ”Linear No Threshold ‘ (LNT) model based on scientific evidence that indicates
there is no safe level of exposure. Any dose however small can be the one which can
cause cancer – sometimes taking years to develop – or genetic damage affecting
future generations.


2 That, therefore, all exposures should be kept ‘As Low As Reasonably Achievable’ –
known as the ALARA principle


3 And that exposures to workers and the public should be kept below specified annual limits.

The science behind this protection regime is based on the capacity of ionising radiation to
cause damage at the cellular level in the human body. Radiation striking a cell can either
cause no damage or it may kill the cell outright – in which case, unless too many cells are
killed at once, the body will eliminate the dead cells and function healthily. The problem
comes when the cell is merely damaged, and the natural process of repair is imperfect,
leaving the cell to replicate in this damaged form – which may in some cases lead to the kind
of growth we call a cancer, other long term health or genetic damage. The level of this kind
of damage (known as stochastic) is a hit-and-miss affair – a low level of radiation exposure
doesn’t determine a health effect but as the level of exposure increases, it increases the
probability of the damage.

Current Standards Need Tightening
The limits on exposure have been progressively tightened over the years as estimates of the
cancer risks, mainly drawn from the Life-Span Studies (LSS) of Japanese survivors of the
Hiroshima and Nagasaki atomic bomb blasts in 1945, showed progressively higher rates of
this stochastic health damage. Recent evidence from studies of workers in the Nuclear
Industries in France the UK and USA (The INWORKS studies) suggest the worker-exposure
limits need to again be revised – and significantly tightened. In addition, studies on health of
populations living close to nuclear power plants in Europe and the USA show significantly
elevated rates of cancer in both children and the elderly directly related to living distance
from these facilities.

United States Proposals Would Weaken Current Standards
Unfortunately, it appears that the USA is headed in the opposite direction and given the
recent behaviour of the current President, may soon pressure other countries to follow suit.
In May 2025 US President Donald Trump issued a Directive (EO 14300) Instructing the US
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to revise all its regulations – in particular, to revise
those relating to radiation health and safety. He instructed the NRC to abandon the LNT
and ALARA principles and re-set limits on worker and public exposures based on ‘deterministic’ rather than ‘probabilistic’/’stochastic ‘ health outcomes – potentially allowing
much higher levels of exposure.


Exactly how the NRC will respond to these directives is unclear. To comply with the
president’s orders would put the USA in conflict with national and international agencies
such as the International Commission of Radiological Protection (ICRP), the United Nations
Scientific Committee on Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR), the US National Academy of
Science’s. Committee on the Biological Effects of Ionising Radiation (the BEIR committee)
and other countries’ national agencies including the Australian Radiation Protection and
Nuclear Standards Agency (ARPANSA) – all of which have recently reaffirmed commitment
to the LN and ARPANSA principles and the current annual limits on worker and public
exposure.


TThe draft of the revised NRC regulations on radiation protection is expected on 30 April
2026 with a 30-day period for comments before the final comprehensive revision of all NRC
regulations is published in November 2026.

An international Campaign
These US proposals have stimulated the beginnings of an international campaign bringing
together trade unions, environment and public health groups and communities concerned
about current and future exposures from mining, industrial, medical, and nuclear radiation
sources. The objectives of this campaign are two-fold:

1 To pressure national and international agencies with responsibility for radiation
protection to publicly repudiate any US regulations that align with the Trump
Directive and resist any pressures from the US to similarly weaken existing national
standards.
2. To build pressure on these national and international agencies to revise and tighten
the standards in line with the best available scientific evidence that the health risks
are greater than those used to set current standards.

The Military Connection
For Australian workers and the public, the situation is complicated by and made more
urgent as a result of the Australia, UK, USA (AUKUS) agreement regarding the building and
stationing of nuclear-powered submarines in Australia. We have already seen the creation
of a separate Australian Naval Nuclear Power Standards Regulator (ANNPSR) that will be
responsible for all standards in the construction, operation, maintenance, decommissioning,
and radioactive waste management from the submarines built or stationed here. We can
expect pressure from the USA to have these standards align with those in the USA. As such
the ANNPSR could become a back door for pressuring the current standards agency
ARPANSA to revise and weaken rather than tighten protection standards across the full
range of other occupational and public radiation health risks.

For further information
For references to the scientific evidence and to be kept informed of developments as this
campaign evolves contact:

Dr Tony Webb,
E-mail: webbt45@icloud.com,

February 20, 2026 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Australia’s culture of complicity

When we look at the visit of the Israeli President Isaac Herzog, we see the complicity in full view. Herzog is like Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, both have no moral backbone.

The executive officer of the Jewish Council of Australia surmised what most independent observers have surmised:

“Herzog represents a state currently facing proceedings before the International Court of Justice for alleged breaches of the Genocide Convention. His public statements have been cited as evidence of incitement to genocide. He supports the expansion of illegal settlements in the West Bank and has made racist statements about Palestinians and Arabs, including depicting a Muslim man in the crosshairs of a gunsight during an election campaign.”

By Kim Sawyer |Independent Australia, 19 February 2026, Dr Kim Sawyer is a retired Associate Professor, University of Melbourne.

WHEN I APPEARED before the first Senate Committee on Whistleblowing in 1994, I spoke of the problem of accomplices.

There was the auditor who prefaced their audit,“Under the direction of senior management,” but only after they were given evidence of  fraud; the auditors who covered up a university enrolling staff to cover shortfalls in enrolments; the regulators who turned a blind eye to financial mismanagement. I came to learn the meaning of complicity.

The 1995 Senate inquiry into 16 unresolved whistleblowing cases was a testament to complicity. There were 16 recommendations; none of them were ever enabled, and it has been the same for most Senate inquiries. The 2001 Senate inquiry into universities recommended the establishment of a universities’ ombudsman but it never happened. Inquiry after inquiry, universities, banks, gambling, lobbying, ASIC, no recommendations are ever followed through.  Politicians so addicted to window dressing that they do not understand their complicity.

Whistleblowing legislation is an example. The government purports to be a supporter of whistleblowing protection, yet it is all spin. There have been no prosecutions for retaliation against whistleblowers, instead whistleblowers have been prosecuted. I have long advocated for a False Claims Act, the most powerful whistleblowing act anywhere. When I spoke to the former Attorney General Mark Dreyfus at a 2008 hearing of the House Constitutional and Legal Affairs Committee about a False Claims Act, he responded that it was too early for Australia. It was 18 years ago and it’s probably too early still…………………………………………………………………………………………………..

When we look at the visit of the Israeli President Isaac Herzog, we see the complicity in full view. Herzog is like Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, both have no moral backbone.

The executive officer of the Jewish Council of Australia surmised what most independent observers have surmised:

“Herzog represents a state currently facing proceedings before the International Court of Justice for alleged breaches of the Genocide Convention. His public statements have been cited as evidence of incitement to genocide. He supports the expansion of illegal settlements in the West Bank and has made racist statements about Palestinians and Arabs, including depicting a Muslim man in the crosshairs of a gunsight during an election campaign.”

Herzog is not popular in Israel. A poll published in July last year found 57 per cent of Israelis dissatisfied with Herzog’s performance, compared with 30 per cent who were satisfied. Given that he is a ceremonial head of state and given that Israel is involved in a war, the poll represents a verdict on his complicity.

Unlike the former President Reuven Rivlin, Isaac Herzog has not challenged Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on the Nation-State Law that weakened the judiciary and allowed Netanyahu to defer charges of corruption.

Herzog’s greatest complicity relates to Gaza. On 7 October, 2023, Hamas killed 1,139 people and took 240 hostages. Since 7 October, 2023, 71,000 Palestinians have been killed, including 20,000 children; 170,000 Palestinians have been injured, many with life-threatening injuries. Surely that constitutes genocide. Surely that requires condemnation.

…………………..The government that has been complicit in the retaliation against whistleblowers and complicit in the victimisation of the victims of scams is now complicit with what has occurred in Gaza. We should never be complicit with genocide.

Perhaps Albanese should watch Awni Eldous on YouTube to get a refresher course on humanity.

February 20, 2026 Posted by | secrets and lies | Leave a comment

Submarine boasts, yet nuclear waste dumps submersed in secrecy.

Albanese and Marles clearly don’t think they’ll be around in politics when the radioactive mess hits the fan. For them, that’s a future Government’s problem to solve.e.

by Rex Patrick | Feb 16, 2026 , https://michaelwest.com.au/submarine-boasts-yet-nuclear-waste-dumps-submersed-in-secrecy/

As the SA Premier basks in the campaign glory of a $3.9 billion downpayment on shipyard for nuclear subs, the Federal Government is kicking the nuclear waste can down the road.    Rex Patrick reports.

Meanwhile, two senior government officials have told the Administrative Review Tribunal that the public they serve need to be kept in the dark on plans to deal with civil and AUKUS nuclear waste.

For over 40 years, Australian governments of various flavours have been trying, and failing, to work out what to do with the nation’s growing medical and industrial nuclear waste. That problem has become harder as the need to deal with AUKUS’s high-level reactor waste has been added to the task.

Australia’s 3,700m3 of low-level and 1,300m3 of intermediate-level radioactive waste is stored in over 100 locations nationwide, including at hospitals, science facilities and at universities.

Since July 2023, when the Federal Court set aside the decision of the Morrison Government to locate a civil National Radioactive Waste Management Facility at Kimba, there’s been radio silence from Prime Minister Albanese’s Government on what the next steps will be.

There has been a similar silence about the plans for AUKUS high-level waste, despite the Government already having a plan for selecting a dump site.

Narrative control

As MWM tried to use Freedom of Information (FOI) laws to squeeze some information from the Government about on what’s going on, what was instead revealed was a conscious plan to keep the public in the dark.

In order to try to keep everything secret the CEO of the Australian Radioactive Waste Agency (ARWA), Mr Sam Usher, give evidence to the Tribunal explaining the dangers of letting what he described as a “nuclear illiterate” Australian public know what’s going on. The Government’s remedy to public illiteracy, it seems, is to keep the public illiterate.

In an 18th-century approach to winning over the public, he affirmed in an affidavit that

“The release of information (requested by MWM) in these circumstances does not align with current messaging or status on (redacted) – which heavily relies on public approval – could negatively impact trust, and the building and sustaining of the social license that ARWA and the Australian Government will need to deliver (redacted).”

And indeed, CEO Usher asked the Tribunal to keep that statement secret. MWM challenged the secrecy, and the Tribunal ordered the statement to be released; trust and social licence, all to be obtained from the public by narrative control.

Thou shalt not debate!

Alex Kelton, Deputy Director General of Strategy at the Australian Submarine Agency, gave similar evidence. The public should not know – it’s too dangerous for government.

Kelton testified that transparency would cause the diversion of Government resources “by inviting [public] discussion about early contemplative thinking on a matter which Australia does not have a long-standing policy position”.

Transparency would, she said:

“provide signalling about the advice to Government which may result in commentary“

“that places pressure on government to rule in or out particular options, ideas or strategies, or effectively forecloses approaches to issues, by reason of adverse public sentiment that is not fully informed and which it is premature for the government to engage publicly on until it has done further work to develop its view of the options and the position.”

The Australian Government has never run a successful program to obtain social licence for a nuclear waste facility. A fact that flows from that is that Deputy Director General Kelton has no experience in such an endeavour either. She was the Chief of Staff to Defence Minister Linda Reynolds, so she does have political experience.

“Important or urgent?“

The argument adopted by Usher and Kelton on behalf of the Government is that there will be a public consultation, but until that occurs, nothing should be made public.

The evidence in the Administrative Review Tribunal paints a disturbing picture.

In the middle of Usher’s evidence was a sentence with unusual quotation marks around the words “important” and “urgent”.

21.9. Managing radioactive waste that is “important” but rarely “urgent”, considering the long lead times involved

Redacted evidence from Kelton, which the Government was later forced to reveal the gist of under challenge from MWM, explained that the Government was sitting on its hands, not doing anything. A brief on how to choose a location for AUKUS nuclear waste was provided to Defence Minister Richard Marles in December 2023, and nothing has happened.

Under cross examination it was clear that Usher was frustrated by the Government’s failure to deal with an “important” issue with the necessary “urgency”,.

No consultation

MWM was at pains to point out to the Tribunal that there is no legal requirement for the Government to conduct consultation. Section 10 of the Australian Naval Nuclear Power Safety Act allows the Defence Minister to issue a regulation declaring any site in Australia as a nuclear facility for the purposes of AUKUS.

No consultation is required, and any future Government, faced with delays caused by inaction by today’s Government, can just announce a site – and in those circumstances, the Government is asking for no information to be released under FOI.

“Any place in Australia is on the cards.”

Kelton also put in her affidavit that (this) Government has announced the AUKUS nuclear waste site will be on current or Defence land.

However, during cross-examination, Kelton conceded that any location in Australia can be selected and then turned into Defence land by way of compulsory acquisition. She confirmed that all the Defence Minister’s announcement means is that whatever land is used, it will be a “Commonwealth Facility”.

Along with an announcement that any decision on a future nuclear submarine will now not be made until the 2030’s, it is clear that from the Administrative Review Tribunal proceedings that, against the advice of the ARWA, the Government are not interested in advancing work on a future high-level radioactive waste dump. Again, starting from scratch, that project might take at least a decade, probably longer, but Marles and Albanese appear to have no interest in getting things underway.

Living in the moment

Marles gets to jump on a private jet and head to Washington to meet with Secretary of War Pete Hegseth. He gets to strut around and talk tough on Defence. Meanwhile, Albanese clings to AUKUS like a political lifebuoy, hoping to avoid a hostile social media post from President Trump and any suggestion Labor is “soft on defence”.

But in a gross act of maladministration, they’re avoiding the tough political decisions needed now if AUKUS nuclear waste, and indeed all our other radioactive waste, is to be properly tackled.

Albanese and Marles clearly don’t think they’ll be around in politics when the radioactive mess hits the fan.  For them, that’s a future Government’s problem to solve.

Rex Patrick

Rex Patrick is a former Senator for South Australia and, earlier, a submariner in the armed forces. Best known as an anti-corruption and transparency crusader, Rex is also known as the “Transparency Warrior.”

February 18, 2026 Posted by | secrets and lies, wastes | Leave a comment

Political Futures: Can the Influence of the Political Far Right be Tamed Across Regional Australia?

15 February 2026 Denis Bright

The Farrer by-election offers a real opportunity for Australian Progressive Politics. This by-election is a potential change-maker.

Conservative representatives have an enormous swathe of regional federal electorates across Australia. In Queensland, these conservative electorates extend into coastal areas north of the Petrie electorate in Brisbane with the current exception of Leichhardt. The twilight zone of adversarial politics extends from the regions to outer metro areas like Longman in Brisbane’s Outer North and even Canning in Metro Perth’s South.

In Canning, Andrew Hastie MP with 42.5 percent of the primary vote scored a swing of 1 percent on his primary vote. This result was built up to 56.6 percent after preference allocations from far-right parties. In Canning the supportive preferences for the LNP came from One Nation and the Citizens’ Party.

A victory for a more moderate Independent in Farrer would have immense national significance in cooling the adversarial nature of politics in regional areas and in outer metro areas.

At this stage, the outcomes of the Farrer by-election are impossible to anticipate. With the support of preference flows from Labor and the Greens, Independent Michelle Milthorpe has a real chance of success. Her significant support against Sussan Ley in the 2025 Australian elections has been well noted by political commentators (Image: Simplified AEC Map from SMH 13 February 2026):

Michelle Milthorpe has quite a following in Albury but her vote after preferences her vote was still 12 percent below Sussan Ley’s vote across the sprawling electorate in 2025 as shown by the overall voting returns:

The results in Albury itself divided approximately 55 to 45 percent in favour of Michelle Milthorpe after preferences. This was Michelle’s strongest support area of support.

The relative prosperity of large towns and farming districts across the Murrumbidgee Irrigation Area (MIA) and Murray Valley distinguishes Farrer from some other regional electorates with higher levels of social disadvantage and a more marginal political category.

Drought conditions and excessive summer heat should click with a grassroots awareness of the need for more action against global warming and climate change. Conservatives detest Labor’s energy initiatives. Liberal Deputy leader, Senator Jane Hume, restated her commitment to nuclear power options (Insiders 14 February 2026).

The more disadvantaged regional electorates very occasionally to Labor in Page, Hinkler and Capricornia. Even Andrew Hastie’s seat of Canning was won by Labor in the substantial swings of 1983 and 1998.

Farrer has never taken this path since the formation of the electorate in 1949. It is far from being a swing seat for Labor. However, the election of a moderate and mainstream representative in Farrer is so important as a symbolic token for the future of regional Australian politics.

My articles for theaimn.net occasionally refer to The Rappville Factor in voting trends in less advantaged conservative regional electorates………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

Ionically, US academic opinion has strengthened our understanding of just why more disadvantaged communities respond to dog-whistle politics to vote against their own self-interest….

If humanity survives this Trump era and learns to control politically motivated media networks, I expect the 2030s to be a peaceful and left-leaning era in both Australia and globally. Future leaders try to tame global capitalism with more open trade and investment by applying the investment multiplier to deliver the essentials of affordable housing, environmental initiatives and other essentials through the resources available through both private and public sector networks.

Keeping Farrer out of the hands of the far-right is an important insurance premium against those never-ending cultural wars which deceive our most disadvantaged fellow-Australians into accepting the prevailing status quo in a thousand country towns and rural districts across regional Australia…………………….

The drift to more progressive policies is complicated by the rise of One Nation in recent polling. NSW State Independent Helen Dalton MP for Murray may stand as a One Nation Candidate. Helen Dalton represents voters in the Griffith-Deniliquin Districts……………………………………………………

Here is another opportunity for the Albanese Government to offer the unexpected outcomes like Environmental Protection legislation, the anti-hate speech measures and bans on inappropriate soft media influence on junior high school students.

From the side lines, negative comments about Angus Taylor’s leadership style have come from former Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull whose own resignation from the LNP leadership paved the way for Scott Morrison to move Australia in a far-right direction………………………………

Progressive Liberals Should be Welcome in the Australian United Front

February 18, 2026 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Australia-based Bannerman Energy join China’s CNNC  for debt-free construction of its Namibian uranium project

World Nuclear News , Friday, 13 February 2026

Australia-based Bannerman Energy has signed a strategic financing and joint venture agreement with China’s CNNC Overseas Limited, paving the way for debt-free construction of its Etango uranium project in Namibia.

Under the agreement, CNNC Overseas Limited (CNOL) – a subsidiary of China National Uranium Corporation (CNUC) and part of China National Nuclear Corporation (CNNC) – and Bannerman will form an incorporated joint venture. This will be done through Bannerman’s UK subsidiary, Bannerman Energy (UK) Ltd (JVCo), by way of CNOL’s subscription for newly issued shares in JVCo, resulting in JVCo ownership of 55% by Bannerman and 45% by CNOL upon completion. JVCo holds a 95% interest in the Etango Project. CNOL will make an initial investment of USD294.5 million into JVCo upon completion.

The agreement includes a provision for additional investment by CNOL of up to USD27 million upon completion, to reimburse Bannerman for CNOL’s 45% share of project-related expenditure incurred between 1 July 2025 and completion. Bannerman and CNOL will each fund post-completion capital expenditure and operating costs of JVCo and the Etango Project pro rata to their respective 55% and 45% equity interests. The agreement also includes a life-of-mine offtake entitlement for CNOL covering 60% of actual production from Etango.

Upon completion, underlying economic ownership of the Etango project will comprise 52.25% Bannerman and 42.75% CNOL, with Namibian social welfare organisation One Economy Foundation (OEF) retaining its 5% loan-carried shareholding.

Bannerman said the agreement “enables debt-free construction of Etango mine – a financing pathway that delivers greater financial and offtake flexibility and with reduced risk”.

The transaction is targeted for completion in mid-2026, pending key conditions including filings with the relevant Chinese government authorities and foreign exchange registration, CNUC shareholder approval, clearance from the Namibian Competition Commission, amendment to the OEF funding agreement, and execution of key infrastructure supply contracts………………………………

Etango is in Namibia’s Erongo uranium mining region, which hosts the operating Rössing (in which CNUC holds a 68.62% stake), Langer Heinrich and Husab uranium mines. The proposed Etango mine received environmental approval in 2010 and the Namibian Ministry of Mines and Energy in 2017 granted Bannerman a five-year, extendable, mineral deposit retention licence over the project. Namibia’s Ministry of Mines and Energy granted Bannerman Energy a mining licence for Etango in December 2023.
https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/articles/bannerman-partners-with-cnnc-for-namibian-uranium-project

February 17, 2026 Posted by | uranium | Leave a comment

Why The Economics of War in Australia Matter

14 February 2026 AIMN Editorial, By Denis Hay  

Australia’s defence spending is rising at a time when housing stress, health system pressure, and energy transition demands are also intensifying.

Public debate often treats defence and social investment as separate conversations. They are not. Both draw on the same public money, skilled labour, industrial capacity, and political attention.

This article examines how the war economy functions, how Australia’s major defence commitments shape long-term fiscal settings, and what opportunity cost means in practical terms. It does not argue for ending defence. It does not dismiss strategic risk.

Instead, it asks a structured economic question: when public funds are allocated to long-duration military programs, which alternatives are delayed or constrained?

Unlike earlier articles on Monetary Sovereignty that focus on financial capacity, this piece concentrates on real resource allocation and political incentives within defence policy.

The Problem: The Economics of War and Locked-in Spending

Rising Global Military Spending

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute reports that global military spending reached US 2.7 trillion in 2024. Australia is part of this global expansion…………………….

Australia’s Major Defence Commitments

Under the Department of Defence strategy and the AUKUS submarine pathway, Australia has committed to multi-decade procurement and sustainment programs………………………………………………………

Systemic Causes

  • Alliance integration priorities
  • Strategic deterrence doctrine
  • Industrial policy embedded within defence
  • Long-term contracting frameworks

Political Incentives

  • Regional job creation promises
  • Perception of strength and security
  • Limited scrutiny of lifecycle costing
  • Concentrated contractor influence

Beneficiaries of the Status Quo

  • Large defence primes
  • Specialist subcontractors
  • Regions hosting major facilities
  • Political actors are able to signal security leadership

This does not imply corruption. It shows structural incentives.

The Economics of War in Australia and Opportunity Cost 

Opportunity cost is not abstract. For example, if $10 billion in defence procurement employs engineers and advanced manufacturers, those same skilled workers are not simultaneously available to expand public housing construction…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Conclusion

The economics of war in Australia are about allocation, not ideology.

Defence commitments such as AUKUS are long-term and capital-intensive. Housing shortages, healthcare strain, and energy transition pressures are immediate and socially destabilising.

Public money reflects political priorities. The central question is whether more military capability delivers greater marginal security than investment in social resilience.

Australia has the institutional capacity to pursue both strategic security and domestic stability. Outcomes depend on policy choice, not inevitability.

The economics of war in Australia are not just about defence budgets or alliance commitments. It is about choices. Every dollar committed to long-term military expansion is a dollar not invested in housing, healthcare, education, and productive industry. A balanced approach to the economics of war in Australia requires transparent costing, clear strategic purpose, and a serious national discussion about opportunity cost. https://theaimn.net/why-the-economics-of-war-in-australia-matter/

February 17, 2026 Posted by | business | Leave a comment

Aussie Flotilla Team to Gaza Announced

13 February 2026 AIMN Editorial, https://theaimn.net/aussie-flotilla-team-to-gaza-announced/

The Australian Delegation of the Global Sumud Flotilla released the names of the first wave of Australians, including several First Nations participants, a feminist author, climate justice activists and an anti-zionist Jewish activist, due to set sail to Gaza in late March 2026.

Australian delegates, including Anny Mokotow, Sam Woripa Watson, Clementine Ford, Surya McEwen, Juliet Lamont, Zack Schofield and Jayden Kitchener-Waters, will join thousands of participants from 100 countries as part of the Global Sumud Flotilla. The flotilla will again attempt to break the illegal Israeli naval blockade of Gaza to deliver crucial aid and medicine to Palestinians.

In January, the Israeli government banned Doctors Without Borders, Oxfam, Save the Children, and over 30 other aid organisations from operating within Gaza. Medical evacuations have ended. This attempt by the Global Sumud Flotilla to break the siege on Gaza is now more vital than ever. One of the Australian delegation’s demands is the establishment of a Palestinian-led humanitarian corridor to deliver food and medicine, and to facilitate the entry of health, legal, engineering, logistics and construction workers to support the people of Gaza.

Spokesperson Juliet Lamont stated: “People around the world have had enough of watching the starvation of children and the bombing of Palestinian families in tents. Members of the Australian delegation are sailing to Gaza to sustain and support life. Meanwhile, the Australian Government hosts the President of Israel, Isaac Herzog, a president who has been accused of incitement to genocide by the United Nations Human Rights Council.”

Juliet Lamont, leader of the Australian delegation sailing to Gaza on the Global Sumud Flotilla, condemned the visit of Israeli President Isaac Herzog to Australia, calling it “a failure of democracy and a betrayal of human rights”.

Zack Schofield of climate activist group Rising Tide stated, “Most Australians reject association with breaches of international law. Australians do not want to welcome or assist the architects of mass civilian starvation. We don’t want to be tied to governments that openly flout the Geneva Convention and commit war crimes.” He confirmed a much larger delegation of Australians will be sailing this time in an attempt to break Israel’s illegal maritime blockade and deliver food and medical aid to Gaza.

As Israel continues to attack Gaza from the air, land and sea (despite the so-called ceasefire), the Global Sumud Flotilla is needed now more than ever to break the siege and to let aid flow to Gaza. According to the Gaza Ministry of Health, since the ‘ceasefire agreement’ came into effect on October 10, 2025, Israeli forces killed more than 464 people, including at least 100 children. UNICEF reports that Israeli bombing injured 1,275 people during this period of time. According to the UN, more than three-quarters of the population of Gaza is facing acute hunger and malnutrition.

Zack Schofield explained “A country our politicians call a mate is actively starving and bombing civilians and instead of punishing that behaviour, we’ve just spent millions in taxpayer dollars to play host to a politician who has, according to the United Nations, incited genocidal violence.”

“Ordinary Australians don’t want us to extend friendship, free trade, and even weapons components to a country so proficient at killing unarmed civilians as people suffer through a cost-of-living crisis at home. It’s time for us to get new mates, get aid to Gaza, and get Australia out of Israel.”

He went on to say, “those of us joining the flotilla will be putting our lives on the line to protect what people we can against tanks made with Australian steel, and bombs dropped from F-35s with Australian engineering.”

Jewish activist Anny Mokotow stated “I’m joining the Flotilla because I cannot stand by while Palestinian children die from starvation, homes and hospitals are bombed, and aid is blocked. As a child of Holocaust survivors, I believe “never again” means for everyone. When governments fail, ordinary citizens must act to bring food, medicine, and hope to the most vulnerable.”

Sam Woripa Watson, Wangerriburrah and Birri Gubba community activist and film maker said “We see our collective liberation in Palestinian liberation, and theirs in ours. As First Nations people, we know what colonial violence looks like – land theft and erasure. Palestinians are facing that same violence now. Standing with Gaza is standing for justice everywhere. Let Palestinians live. Let aid flow. Cut ties with Israel.”

Author Clementine Ford stated on joining the Flotilla “I am no different to the mothers in Gaza, even if governments want me to believe I am while they send weapons that kill their children. I know what it is to love a child the same way Palestinian parents do. Let aid flow. Cut ties with Israel.”

Jayden Kitchener-Waters a Gomeroi and Ngiyampaa singer and storyteller said “Our government is helping to do to Palestinians what they did to our people – colonisation, land theft, and starvation. We need to cut ties with Israel, instead of spending millions on bringing Herzog here.”

Surya McEwen, taking part in his fourth flotilla stated “We all feel that the suffering on this mass scale is too much to bear, and something desperately has to be done. Taking these steps together is the most natural and reasonable response in the world. Let Palestinians live. Let aid flow. Cut ties with Israel.”

The Global Sumud Flotilla is calling on people around the world to get involved, sign up to join the flotilla or donate and follow online to keep participants safe. The Flotilla will be sailing from various ports around the Mediterranean from late March 2026 onwards.

February 16, 2026 Posted by | politics international | Leave a comment

NSW Police’s attacks on protesters in Sydney likely to lead to lawsuits

10 Feb 26

February 16, 2026 Posted by | New South Wales, politics | Leave a comment

The non-corporate nuclear-related news this week

Some bits of good news

France launches its largest ever rewilding project in the Dauphiné Alps. 

 Chile’s dark skies look set to stay that way.

Colombia Cedes Vast Amazon Land to Indigenous Peoples as Deforestation Surges


TOP STORIES. 

As Landmark Treaty Expires, No Binding Limits on US-Russia Nuclear Arsenals. 

The right to have nukes. 

The Future of Los Alamos Lab: More Nuclear Weapons or Cleanup? 

If You Think Our Rulers Do Bad Things In Secret, Wait Til You See What They Do Out In The Open. 

Left to Bleed: How Israeli Forces Treat the Killing of Palestinian Children as Routine. 

WANTED: Volunteers to host nuclear waste, forever. 

Climate. These US states want polluters to pay for the rising insurance costs of climate disasters.

Noel’s notes. The complex, long-form writers – but is anybody listening?

AUSTRALIA. Aussie Flotilla Team to Gaza Announced. .                                                                           In Australia The Police Beat You Up For Opposing Genocide.                                                           Selective context: Why Isaac Herzog’s visit deepens Australia’s moral failure.                                                                                         Albanese v Albanese.      

For more see Australian nuclear-related news this week

NUCLEAR-RELATED ITEMS       

ATROCITIES. Israel Destroyed Gaza’s Hospitals – Now It’s Banning Doctors Without Borders.
ECONOMICS. Electricity: A confidential EDF report anticipates an explosion in costs and risks.
EMPLOYMENT. Nuclear weapons workers vote for strike action. Dounreay workers among 200 allowed to leave Nuclear Restoration Services’ UK in early exit scheme
ENERGY. Nuclear Power –A White Elephant in the Energy Debate.
ENVIRONMENT ‘Green laws hold up nuclear plans —but we can’t say where’– ALSO AT https://nuclear-news.net/2026/02/14/4-b1-green-laws-hold-up-nuclear-plans-but-we-cant-say-where/  A Business Necessity: Align With Nature or Risk Collapse, IPBES Report Warns.  Trump nixes nukes from environmental reviews.  £700m plan with ‘fish disco’ could save 90% of marine life, says Hinkley Point C study.  New Mexico Environment Department Takes Necessary Action on Los Alamos National Laboratory’s Hexavalent Chromium Plume.
ETHICS and RELIGION. Rot at the Top: The Elite’s Darkest Secrets Spill Out.
EVENTS. 19 February – VIRTUAL EVENT-Decision Time: AI and Our Nuclear Arsenal 
HEALTH. Residential proximity to nuclear power plants and cancer incidence in Massachusetts, USA (2000–2018).
INDIGENOUS ISSUES. Submissions to the Federal Court of Appeal about UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) .Sizewell C opponents to appeal High Court decision.  Palestine Action protesters found not guilty of Elbit burglary.
MEDIA. Leading PapersCall for Destroying Iran to Save It.  Whitehaven’s Polluted Harbour is “Riviera of the North” NuSpeak Lives.
OPPOSITION to NUCLEAR . An environmental coalition defends Environmental Justice (EJ)  against the Canadian Nuclear Waste Management Organization’s (NWMO) latest Deep Geological Repository (DGR) scheme.

POLITICS.

POLITICS INTERNATIONAL and DIPLOMACY.

RADIATION. Shrimp with a side of cancer? – Radioactive contamination is real.
SAFETY. Russian nuclear agency insists it can run seized Ukrainian atomic power plant. France must start to plan nuclear closures – safety chief.
SECRETS and LIES. UK ignores corruption scandals when awarding major military contracts.
SPACE. EXPLORATION, WEAPONS. Hegseth calls for U.S. space dominance.
SPINBUSTER. Ontario – Lecce’s nuclear spin –and the $3.3 billion he forgot to mention EDF makes distorted claims about Hinkley C fish deterrent.
TECHNOLOGY. US campaign puts case for disposal, not reprocessing, of used nuclear fuel.
WASTES. Hanford begins removing waste from 24th single-shell tank.

WAR and CONFLICT.

WEAPONS and WEAPONS SALES.

February 15, 2026 Posted by | Weekly Newsletter | Leave a comment

Australian nuclear-related news this week

AUSTRALIA. 

February 14, 2026 Posted by | Christina reviews | Leave a comment

A “Call for Peace”

Australian Anti=AUKUS Coalition

We call on the Government of Australia in the interests of peace and security for the Australian people and the region:

  • To advise its AUKUS partners that Australia will not be involved in a war against China over Taiwan or disputed territorial waters in the South China Sea, or any other country, and will not allow use of Australian territory for that purpose
  • To sign and ratify the United Nations Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons.
  • To cancel military spending for AUKUS war preparations, including cancellation of the acquisition of nuclear-propelled submarines, so that urgent domestic social needs (climate change mitigation, education, health including public hospitals and housing) can be better addressed.

Please read the full statement and sign here

February 13, 2026 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

 18 February – Rally against militarism and the Australian military establishment 

Wednesday 18th of February at 4:30  Outside the Hyatt hotel  

February 13, 2026 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Exposing the DISTURBING ISRAELI Lobby inside Australia | Ex-Foreign Minister Bob Carr

In this exclusive interview, former Australian Foreign Minister, the Hon. Bob Carr reveals the deep underlying influence of the Israeli lobby in Australian politics – and how it has long shaped Canberra’s stance on Israel–Palestine.

Once a co-founder of the Labor Friends of Israel with Bob Hawke in 1977, Carr has undergone a dramatic transformation – from being hailed in Tel Aviv as an “honourable gentile” to now becoming one of the loudest critics of Israel’s brutality in Gaza.

February 13, 2026 Posted by | secrets and lies | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries