Antinuclear

Submissions to Senate: more people oppose a nuclear waste dump in Kimba or Hawker

The 58 submissions to the Senate, opposing the plan for the process for selecting a nuclear waste dump site come from a variety of organisations and individuals, and include residents of Eyre Peninsula.

These are some points that came up as they answered the Term of Reference, especially  (f) – Any related matters. (These submissions also generally gave full answers to the other 5 more narrow Terms of Reference)

Comprehensive criticism of the entire process. (ENUFF  Submission no. 109)    No justification for dump   (Wakelin B No. 23)  Why the assumption it has to be  South Australia.?     (Wauchope N. No.  21)   Flawed process (Hughes No. 57)   (Mitchell No. 25) Opposed to process, not necessarily to dump (Lienert L No. 50)  End the process  (Noonan, D No 31)  Longterm negative effects (Sisters of St Joseph No. 68 )

Nuclear wastes. Wants re-examination of waste plans (CCSA 55 )  Intermediate wastes   (Mitchell 25,  Scott C 14 ) Prelude to commercial waste import? (Name Withheld 90 )  Dangers Waste types ( Noonan, D31  Wauchope N  21 )  Lucas Heights best site  (Taylor A 82 )  stranded wastes (Tulloch S 32)

Issues of dishonesty – lack of trust  (Ashton 73)  Hypocrisy of DIIS   (Bannon 85  Fergusson 106) Biased committees (Scott T 44)  Biased and misleading information given  (Thomas 36 Tiller J 9   Tulloch B 87)  Dishonest process   (Tulloch R 62 ) Conflicts of interest (Cushway  6   Fels P 84  Fergusson 106 )

Illegality of setting up nuclear dump – (Gaweda 54 Madigan 26 Scott T 44 Stokes B Tulloch S 32 Walker 20 )

Aboriginal  issues well beyond the Term of Reference about this. Strongly Aboriginal  In depth on Aboriginal interaction (ATLA No 42  MKenzie K 78  McKenzie R 107) History of Aboriginal interaction (Bangarla 56 )History. (Madigan 26   MKenzie K 78)

July 20, 2018 - Posted by Christina MacPherson | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, Federal nuclear waste dump