Antinuclear

Premier Barry O’Farrell declared the move would help boost the state economy, particularly in light of the federal government decision to allow export of uranium to India. As expected, it was met with furious opposition from environment groups. Greenpeace labelled it “obscene”.

But while O’Farrell talked up the decision as a potential economic boost, he insisted his government was “not about to rush into mining uranium until we have carried out the necessary environmental and exploration checks and have had a mature and sensible discussion about utilising this resource”.

Since then, NSW Resources Minister Chris Hartcher has been shepherding aspirant explorers through the application process.

It follows that of other mineral exploration licences: companies must lodge expressions of interest to explore for uranium before being assessed by an expert panel and then ultimately invited to apply by the minister.

Last November, Hartcher announced that 39 companies had lodged expressions of interest to explore for uranium in NSW.

But details since have been scarce. In an update in March, the minister’s office said an evaluation committee had had its “initial meeting” and the department “is currently progressing the appointment of an independent probity auditor who will oversee the whole evaluation process”.

Clayton Utz has since been appointed probity auditor. In May, the minister’s office said evaluation of the expressions of interest were due to begin, with an announcement of the successful applicants due “mid-year”.

It’s far from clear, but presumably the announcement – which must be imminent – will not only tell us which companies have applied to explore uranium, but also where they want to do so.

This may be one reason O’Farrell has come down so hard on the recommendation of the Public Accounts Committee, chaired by Liberal backbencher Jonathan O’Dea, about nuclear power in NSW.

In a controversial finding following its inquiry into the economics of energy generation in NSW, the committee recommended the government reopen the conversation on the prospect of nuclear energy in the state.

On June 17 – a day before the state budget – the government quietly tabled its official response. It makes for interesting reading.

The response notes current legislation “continues to prohibit the construction of nuclear generation facilities in this state”.

But it continues: “The NSW government supports ongoing community discussion on all forms of energy generation and notes that the drivers to the establishment of nuclear power in many countries around the globe have been based upon energy security – an area in which Australia and NSW have been fortunate with substantial reserves of coal and gas”.

As an official response presumably agreed to at the highest levels of government, it gives plenty of wriggle room for a nuclear generation future in NSW. But it seems the Premier has quite a different view.

“The Uranium Mining and Nuclear Facilities (Prohibitions) Act 1986 continues to prohibit the construction of nuclear generation facilities in this state,” a spokesman told Fairfax Media when approached about the response.

“There has been and will be no change in the NSW government’s position on that.”

The disparate responses reveal a couple of things. First, there are clearly some very senior members of the government interested in exploring – even promoting – the idea of nuclear energy generation for NSW.

But also that, for the time being at least, the politics of such a policy direction are firmly ruling it out.