Scrap nuclear: Key Liberal senator wants radioactive energy plan buried
David Crowe and Paul Sakkal, May 6, 2025
The Liberal Party is set for a pivotal clash over nuclear power after a key senator broke ranks to urge her colleagues to dump their plans for atomic energy, shaping the choice over the party’s leadership and direction.
The warning from Liberal senator Maria Kovacic marks the first public rejection of the nuclear plan from a member of the federal party room ahead of a broader debate about how to recover from the catastrophic defeat at the election.
The move comes as deputy Liberal leader Sussan Ley and shadow treasurer Angus Taylor contest a tight race to decide the leadership, with each side approaching immigration spokesman Dan Tehan to serve as deputy.
A damaging leak of internal polling, revealed by this masthead on Tuesday, has also fuelled discontent within the party, as MPs criticise the party’s pollster, Freshwater Strategy, for providing data that that gave Liberal leader Peter Dutton a false sense of confidence.
Kovacic said the election campaign showed that younger voters did not support the nuclear policy, based on her experience with Liberal candidates at polling stations, and that the party needed to listen to the verdict from voters last Saturday.
“We know how tough it is out there, and we didn’t offer Australian voters a legitimate alternative – and they sent that message very, very clearly on Saturday,” she said.
“And we can’t deny the fact that our nuclear plan was a part of that because it was one of the keystone policies.
“So it’s my view that the Liberal Party must immediately scrap the nuclear energy plan and back the private market’s investment in renewable energy.”
Liberal leader Peter Dutton embraced nuclear power in August 2022 after calls from Nationals leader David Littleproud to adopt the policy, but the plan set off a political firestorm over the $331 billion forecast to build and own the power stations.
While the Liberals expect to launch an election review to consider their defeat, Kovacic said the nuclear policy needed to be dumped immediately…………………………………….https://www.theage.com.au/politics/federal/tehan-firms-as-kingmaker-in-liberal-leadership-battle-as-polling-leak-sparks-recriminations-20250506-p5lwvy.html
Will the Coalition ditch its nuclear power policy?
The Liberals Against Nuclear group said in a media release that the “Liberal Party’s resounding defeat in Saturday’s federal election has confirmed what Liberals Against Nuclear has warned for months: the party’s nuclear energy policy was poison that contradicted core party principles.”
“As the party chooses its next leader, denouncing the nuclear energy policy and recommitting to traditional Liberal values must be the litmus test for any potential candidate.”
Jim Green, May 7, 2025, https://reneweconomy.com.au/will-the-coalition-ditch-its-nuclear-power-policy/?fbclid=IwY2xjawKIr5RleHRuA2FlbQIxMQBicmlkETEwN2xCZ0tDcWVCOTJLWjlyAR4dM_A5TV1mtAJXuKwDuXNCPTqBkEx6aqXLiVG_4RSf4CuBw0LCKjXx5M_THQ_aem_9Jf-rhE2w-fA5kbvxu0a4A
There is abundant evidence that the Coalition’s nuclear power policy was a significant drag on its vote on Saturday. On election night, energy minister Chris Bowen said:
“I mean this was a policy that was never going to survive contact with reality. It was a policy that was radical and risky … The Australian people have cast a very strong judgement on this. I mean we had polling a while ago showing 47 percent of voters in Dickson were less likely to vote for Peter Dutton because of the nuclear policy. Peter Dutton said it was a referendum on energy, which we were happy with, and the way the results are flowing, the result of that referendum on energy, nuclear vs renewables, is crystal clear.”
Even Clive Palmer was bagging nuclear power on election night, pointing to the troubled Flamanville reactor project in France that was 14 years overdue and five times over-budget.
Seven News political editor Mark Riley said: “The party that chose nuclear energy as its policy has exploded in a nuclear bomb set on them by voters tonight.”
An editorial in the Sydney Morning Herald summarised the Coalition’s nuclear problem:
“But outside the corridors of political power, his nuclear power policy played a role in the Coalition defeat on Saturday. Dutton was unable to justify or explain the cost adequately. His power stations were too expensive and bent future budgets into contortion. The CSIRO was unimpressed, and the private sector wanted nothing to do with them.
“Worse, they were a gift to Labor. It dawned on both sides early in the campaign that the nuclear policy had turned toxic. Labor jumped on it and Dutton’s battle bus steered well clear of the proposed nuclear sites.
“The fantasy of the timeline to bring the nuclear power stations online and the dubious costings only added to the voters’ perceptions that Dutton was talking hot air and that his promised policy would never happen.
“Now it’s back to square one for the Liberals on energy policy. It will not be easy. The shattered party must rebuild to recapture the heartland after it was crudely shoved towards conservative populism by Dutton and friends. Policy development will be a major cornerstone of that recovery. And energy is central to credible reform.”
Liberals Against Nuclear
The Liberals Against Nuclear group said in a media release that the “Liberal Party’s resounding defeat in Saturday’s federal election has confirmed what Liberals Against Nuclear has warned for months: the party’s nuclear energy policy was poison that contradicted core party principles.”
Spokesman Andrew Gregson said that Liberals Against Nuclear would continue its campaign against the nuclear policy:
“This result sees the Liberals facing a generational wipeout. Only significant and immediate change can chart of pathway back. Dropping the disastrous nuclear policy right now would demonstrate they are prepared to listen, learn and act.
“Since launching our campaign, we’ve been overwhelmed by messages from Liberals across Australia who share our dismay that such a consequential policy emerged without the robust debate that has always defined our party’s decision-making. Fellow Liberals have expressed frustration that a policy of this magnitude was imposed without the transparent consultation that true Liberal values demand.
“Saturday’s election results are simply the latest and most compelling evidence that the party faithful never signed up for nuclear and would not follow Mr Dutton down this path.
“As the party chooses its next leader, denouncing the nuclear energy policy and recommitting to traditional Liberal values must be the litmus test for any potential candidate.”
Divisions
There are deep divisions within the Coalition over energy policy, so much so that a split is under consideration. Canvassing a split, Queensland Senator Matt Canavan said he wants more coal power plants built and an end to the Coalition’s net zero emissions policy. He appears to be ambivalent about nuclear power: “I’m not against nuclear but … it would take some time. We need solutions now for the Australian people.”
Other Nationals MPs are promoting retention of the nuclear power policy, including leader David Littleproud, senate leader Bridget McKenzie, Colin Boyce and Michelle Landry.
The Nationals are congratulating themselves for outperforming the Liberal Party in the election. But the nuclear policy was initiated and strongly pushed by the Nationals and it was a drag on the Coalition vote across the country.
The ABC’s Jacob Greber said: “Littleproud has driven them onto the rocks, as a political movement, with the nuclear plan.” He further noted: “David Littleproud, the Nationals leader, vowed his nuclear power plan would not come at the expense of Liberals in the cities. He has a tough road ahead after this mess.”
Liberal MPs are beginning to publicly call for the Coalition to ditch its nuclear power policy. Senator Maria Kovacic said: “the Liberal Party must immediately scrap the nuclear energy plan and back the private market’s investment in renewable energy.”
Kovacic added:
“I think the result on Saturday is a pretty clear election review of what Australians think. We will not be electable for Gen Z and millennial voters who thought, you know, we were having them on with this policy. The idea that the party of free markets and small government would nationalise a major portion of the energy system is completely at odds with what we stand for.”
Liberal Senator James Paterson said he is not likely to fight to retain the nuclear policy, that nuclear power would be “logistically challenging” and “self-evidently more difficult” to implement in three years given the looming retirement of coal-fired power stations.
The SA Liberal Party announced two days after the federal election that it has dropped its policy of promoting nuclear power. The state party had promised a nuclear royal commission and created a position of ‘Shadow Minister for Nuclear Readiness’. But leader Vincent Tarzia said on Monday that nuclear power has been “comprehensively rejected and we know the thing is with the energy transition, in three years’ time we will be in another position again.”
If the Coalition persists with its nuclear power policy, it will have no support whatsoever from Liberal / LNP parties in the five states targeted for reactors.
Academic Adam Simpson wrote in The Conversation:
“After Saturday’s Coalition rout, the prospect of nuclear power in Australia should be dead and buried. But that’s not guaranteed. The National Party strongly backs nuclear power. With metropolitan Liberals sceptical of nuclear reduced to a rump, the Nationals and regional Liberals will gain influence within the Coalition. If conservative Nationals prevail, we may well see the nuclear policy survive the election post-mortem and be resurrected for the next election.”
Given the drag of the nuclear policy on the Coalition’s vote, it’s hard to see them going to the next election still promising to build seven taxpayer-funded nuclear power plants across five states. A compromise might be reached whereby a Coalition government would repeal federal laws banning nuclear power, and perhaps establish yet another inquiry, but without the commitment to go ahead with the seven proposed nuclear plants. Colin Boyce hinted at a compromise: “At the bare minimum, we need to remove the moratorium, at least.”
Dr. Jim Green is the national nuclear campaigner with Friends of the Earth Australia and a member of the EnergyScience Coalition.
The Nationals & Liberals are idealogically invested in nuclear weapons for Australia.
Claudio Pompili, 7 May 25
Yep…. until next time…
The Nationals & Lib They are still smarting from the fact of the UK having declined this option after the Maralinga atomic bomb tests. They deduced that having a civil nuclear power generation program was vital in acquiring a necessary social licence for a comprehensive nuclear program. They have zealously pursued this goal ever since, as evidenced by the innumerable and relentless inquiries & royal commissions. Slowly but surely they are manufacturing consent with the Australian public, as evidenced by the recent pre-election polls.
The pro-nukes in the Nats/Libs and their formidable enablers will never stop, and are encouraged by the bipartisan support for AUKUS. They believe that China/North Korea/Russia/Iran scare tactics coupled with immigration will eventually prevail and Australia will have its own nukes. The fight is not over. Until the next time…
Who defeated the Nazis in World War 2 ? Thank God for Hollywood!
On the 8th May 1945, Germany surrendered unconditionally to the Allies. On the 9th May 2025, Russia is holding a grand commemoration – a “Victory Day” for the 80th anniversary of this event.
How dare they? I know, from my extensive cinema history, that the Americans won World War 2.
Many exciting and entertaining movies have been made, over the decades, glorifying the courage and success of the good soldiers on the good side – several allied nations, notably the British. But my favourites were always from Hollywood. There were so many, and of course, I haven’t seen them all.
From early on, there were movies like The Story of G.I. Joe, Dive Bomber, So Proudly We Hail! and Sahara . And During World War II, Disney made films for every branch of the United States Armed Forces and government.
Hollywood downplayed the efforts and contributions of the other Allies . But some films grudgingly acknowledged the United Kingdom, who kept the hopeless fight alive until the USA joined in and saved the day. Non-European Allies are mostly never even mentioned, especially China, with its pivotal role in the war against Japan. The Soviet-German war on the Eastern Front if mentioned at all, is sometimes portrayed as a sideshow .
Some movies based on real events, such as the film U571 are about real persons who were not American, depicted them as Americans. U571 (2000) is about American submariners. ‘Red Tails’ (2012)is a great exaggeration about American airmen. In some movies, we learn that WWII only began only on December 7, 1941, when the United States entered the war. Some movies are such fun, even if fictional, for example the Americans killing Hitler in Inglourious Basterds.
Many movies are about the overall war effort , but focus on America’s involvement. Some of these films include Saving Private Ryan (1998) Flags of Our Fathers (2006): Band of Brothers (2001). Films on the D Day landings give the impression that the American landing on Omaha Beach was the decisive turning point that led to Allied victory in Europe.
Now, I know that I’m pretty right, in claiming that the Americans won World war 2. In our democratic culture we accept the opinions of the many. The more common view is now that the Americans were the primary reason for the Nazi defeat, with 40-52% in America and Europe saying so. (But Britons think it was the UK).
In 1945, 57% of French citizens believed Moscow “contributed most to the defeat of Germany in 1945” – just 20% named the US, and 12% Britain. By 2015, less than a quarter of respondents recognised the Soviet role, with 54% believing the US to be Nazism’s ultimate vanquisher. Today only 17-28% of Europeans and Americans suggest that the USSR did the bulk of the work in bringing down Hitler.
If you go to Encyclopedia Britannica, or Wikipedia, or many history sites, you are told some extraordinary facts and figures about the role of the Soviet Union in World War 2, and they attribute the defeat of Nazi Germany as being mainly achieved by the Russians, with substantial input from Britain and the USA.
For example – “The Eastern Front was decisive in determining the outcome in the European theatre of operations in World War II, eventually serving as the main reason for the defeat of Nazi Germany The decisive battles were Stalingrad, Kursk, and the Battle of Berlin.”
You find this sort of information – ” The Soviet Union lost at least 26 million in World War II, Considerably more than any other country. Russian casualties were 60 times the number of American casualties…. .. More Russian died at Stalingrad than Americans and Britons died in the whole war.”
D Day 6 June 1944, was a big day in bringing the war towards the end. Approximately 156,000 Allied troops landed in Normandy, France, of which nearly half were from the USA. Additionally, smaller contingents of troops from other allied countries were also involved. So at least the various historical records agree that the USA was strongly involved in the eventual victory, even though they joined in the war effort only in December 1941.
But now, it’s time to correct the records on who defeated the Nazis. Britain and Europe are doing their best, holding VE Day celebrations, in which Russia is excluded. And now, Donald Trump has issued a proclamation designating Thursday as a day for the United States to celebrate its victory in World War II -” we did more than any other Country, by far, in producing a victorious result on World War II”
President Donald Trump is busily correcting historical records, taking over the National Archives, or as he puts it RESTORING TRUTH AND SANITY TO AMERICAN HISTORY
So, between the entertainment culture, the political views of the Western Powers, and finally, no less a history expert than Donald Trump himself, we can hope that all that nonsense about Russia winning WW2 can be put to bed.
South Australia Liberals who first pushed 100 pct renewables – then went nuclear – now reverse course after poll wipeout
ReNewEconomy, May 5, 2025, Joshua S Hill
The South Australian Liberal party, which set the state’s first 100 per cent renewables target when in government six years ago, before embracing nuclear while in opposition, has reversed course again after the federal poll wipeout and the loss of a long time Liberal seat in Adelaide.
South Australia leads the world in the uptake of variable renewables, with a 72 per cent share of local demand over the last 12 months.
The then Liberal state government in 2019 set a target of reaching 100 per cent “net” renewables by 2030, before the current Labor government accelerated that target to 2027, and enshrined it into law, based on the planning for new wind and solar projects, battery storage and transmission.
New state Liberal leader Vincent Tarzia reversed course on renewables last year, supporting the federal Coalition’s plan to build nuclear power at seven sites across Australia, including at Port Augusta in South Australia, the site of the coal fired power stations that closed nearly a decade ago.
However, speaking to ABC Radio Adelaide, Tarzia has now backed away from his party’s election commitment to hold a Royal Commission into nuclear energy, saying it was clear that the technology has been “comprehensively rejected” by the electorate.
A potential nuclear future had been a top priority for the South Australian Liberal Party, promising in June last year to hold yet another Royal Commission into the technology. This was followed in August by the appointment of Stephen Patterson, the state MP for Morphett, as spokesman for Nuclear Readiness.
Tarzia’s comments came after the Liberals lost the last of their Adelaide based federal seats, including the once safe seat of Sturt, in last weekend’s federal election campaign…………………………………. https://reneweconomy.com.au/s-a-liberals-who-first-pushed-100-pct-renewables-then-went-nuclear-reverse-course-after-poll-wipeout/
1 This month
of the week – Disrupting War & Militarism in Oceania. Active solidarity. Radical practice.
Antinuclear 