Name Withheld (Submission No. 90) has serious concerns about the nuclear waste dump plan
Name Withheld (Submission No. 90) Inquiry into selection process for a national radioactive waste management facility in South Australia
The appropriateness and thoroughness of the site selection process for a national radioactive waste management facility at Kimba and Hawker in South Australia noting the Government has stated that it will not impose such a facility on an unwilling community, with particular reference to:
a) the financial compensation offered to applicants for the acquisition of land under the Nominations of Land Guidelines Financial compensation for land acquired for the radioactive waste facility should be at current land value. Land owners have been invited to apply to sell their land for the repository.
Taxpayer funded compensation above land value risks allegations of coercion.
b) how the need for broad community support has played and will continue to play a part in the process, including:
: i) the definition of broad community support Broad community support, in respect of radioactive waste management, must go beyond the immediate communities of Hawker and Kimba.
At the very least there should be support from the whole South Australian community. A central waste facility requires waste to be transported by road, rail, sea and air. At the very least the communities through which radioactive waste will transit should be consulted.
ii) how ‘broad community support has been or will be determined for each process advancement stage
I am not aware of any process used to determine broad community support. To my knowledge provision of information the opportunity to vote on the proposed waste management site has been limited to the immediate Kimba and Hawker communities.
c) how any need for Indigenous support has played and will continue to play a part in the process, including how Indigenous support has been or will be determined for each process advancement stage;
I have been told by Aboriginal people living in the Hawker area that the Adnyamanthna community is divided on whether a nuclear waste dump should be built on their land.
I am not aware of any process used to seek support from Aboriginal people in the Kimba area
d) whether and/or how the Government’s ‘community benefit’ payments affect broad community and Indigenous community sentiment A report in the Eyre Peninsula Tribune (01/03/2018) states $2m is available through the Community Benefit Program. AusIndustry claims that ‘real and tangible benefits’ will be delivered. Without information on how applications will be assessed it is difficult to determine who will benefit and the nature of that benefit. It is possible the allocation of money to selected projects will greatly influence some individual’s and group’s support for the proposal
e) whether wider (Eyre Peninsula or state-wide) community views should be taken into consideration and, if so how this is occurring or should be occurring; The management of nuclear waste is a statewide issue, arguably a national issue. The impact of mismanagement of the facility, or a natural or manufactured disaster will be felt for a very, very long time and more broadly than within the local communities.
A report in the print media (10-11 March 2018) on the Fukushima disaster stated that remediation and clean up of that site was stalled with no anticipated completion date. The Chernobyl site remains a restricted (and contaminated) area. South Australia has had a royal commission into the nuclear power industry which gave qualified support to its development. Subsequently a citizens jury rejected the proposal to develop a nuclear power industry.
In June 2017 then Premier Weatherill said (ABC news) that both major parliamentary parties need to support a nuclear waste repository in order for it to go ahead. As stated in b) i) above, a central waste repository requires waste to be transported from interstate (and probably in the future, overseas). transport by road, rail, sea and air means a large number of communities stand to be affected and should have a say in the decision to proceed.
f) any other related issues I have listened to members of both the Hawker and Kimba communities and heard how the nuclear waste repository issue has divided the communities. In small communities such divisions can be very destructive.
South Australia is proud of its clean, green reputation. That reputation is risked with the construction of a nuclear waste dump.
My fear is the construction of a national nuclear waste repository is a precursor to becoming the centre for the world’s nuclear waste.
No comments yet.
Antinuclear 
Leave a Reply