The danger of Australia mindlessly aligning with the “Anglosphere”
Australia’s dangerous obsession with the Anglosphere, The 
Conversation, Professorial Fellow in Human Security, La Trobe University, 22 June 18
Over the past three weeks the ABC program Four Corners has presented special reports on American politics, which involved one of our best journalists, Sarah Ferguson, travelling to the US on special assignment. I watched these programs and I enjoyed them. But in part I enjoyed them because they covered ground that is already familiar.
If the same effort had gone into bringing us in-depth special reports from, say, Jakarta or Mumbai they would have been less familiar, but perhaps more interesting. Most important they would not be stories already covered by major English language media to which we have extraordinary access.
As we struggle to make sense of a changing world order, in which the role of the US seems less defined and dependable, our fascination with things American continues to grow. It is one of the ironies of current Australian life that preoccupation with “the Anglosphere”, a favourite phrase of former prime minister Tony Abbott’s, is in practice shared by many who regard themselves as progressive.
What is the Anglosphere? The Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines it as “the countries of the world in which the English language and cultural values predominate”, clearly referring to Britain, the United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. A surprisingly recent term, it was coined by the science-fiction writer Neal Stephenson in his 1995 novel The Diamond Age, and then picked up by a number of conservative commentators.
The Churchillian notion of near-mythical bonds created by the English language and British heritage has always attracted Australian conservatives
……… Despite 50 years of governments talking about Australia as part of Asia, now somewhat rebadged in the concept of the Indo-Pacific, our cultural guardians continue to behave as if nothing has changed. We may be wary of Trump’s America, and a little bemused by the reappearance of Little Britain, but we still look unreflectively to the US and Britain for intellectual guidance……..
Australia is not Britain or the United States, and there is a paradox that we are more and more obsessed with them even as their relative importance in the world, and certainly in our region of the world, declines. …….
Australia has a bipartisan record of sending troops overseas to win the gratitude of our “great and powerful friends”.
With an American president who seems uninterested in traditional alliances and unmoved by appeals to protect democracy or human rights, one might expect the government would be more conscious of the reality that US and Australian interests will not always converge. On the contrary: they seem to be working harder to align us with the United States.
……… culture and foreign policy meet: alarm bells about Chinese influence ignore the far greater sway of American, to a lesser extent British, influence on our everyday lives. Yes, China is a repressive authoritarian state which is trying to increase its global influence. Yes, we should be cautious about their expansion. But too often we view this through an American prism, rather than making the effort to understand how the shifting power relations are being understood in countries in our region……..
The danger of aligning ourselves with the Anglosphere is that it distorts the complexity of the greater world and aligns us with policies that are neither in our national interest nor that of a more just world. Just as republicans can enjoy the spectacle of a royal wedding without abandoning the idea of an Australian head of state, we need to remind ourselves that Trump is, literally, not our president. https://theconversation.com/friday-essay-australias-dangerous-obsession-with-the-anglosphere-97443?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=The%20Weekend%20Conversation%20-%20104769250&utm_content=The%20Weekend%20Conversation%20-%20104769250+CID_d2601f3250ee129a2a85691211523ae8&utm_source=campaign
Water wars: A new front in the fight against Adani
‘In April Adani applied to the federal Department of Environment and Energy
to expand a dam by 450% and build a pipeline for its Carmichael coalmine,
without an assessment under national environment laws.
‘The project, North Galilee Water Scheme, involves expanding an existing
2.2 billion-litre dam to 10 billion litres and building associated infrastructure,
including 110 kilometres of pipeline to transport water
from the Suttor River and Burdekin Basin. The aim is to supply at least
12.5 gigalitres of fresh water to the Carmichael coalmine and
other mines in the Galilee Basin in central Queensland. …
‘In its application, Adani said the water trigger applies only to
projects associated with extraction. …
‘“It’s an incredibly narrow reading of the EPBC Act,” said
Australian Conservation Foundation Stop Adani campaigner Christian Slattery.
“Clearly it’s a project connected with coalmining.”
‘“If this interpretation is accepted by the minister it further demonstrates
the weaknesses of the EPBC Act and the need for a new generation of environmental laws.”
‘Labor’s environment spokesperson Tony Burke said the government should ensure
a thorough and rigorous environmental assessment is conducted:
“Adani cannot evade the scrutiny of the expert independent scientific committee,
and the minister for the environment should not be facilitating an opportunity for Adani
to avoid scientific scrutiny on its use of water.
‘“The more I look at this [Carmichael] project and the way the company has dealt with
different layers of government the more sceptical I have become.”
‘Lock the Gate Alliance campaign coordinator Carmel Flint said the proposal came
when “most of central Queensland is in drought” and the effects on other water users
and the environment must be considered.
‘“Adani is apparently trying to sneak through approval for a massive water scheme
without a full environmental assessment … in our view that’s an activity
which is absolutely required to go through the water trigger,” she said. …
‘Adani’s claims in the application, in relation to consultation with local Traditional Owners
and its track record on adherence to environmental regulations, are spurious at best. …
‘It makes no mention that its dodgy Indigenous Land Use Agreement (ILUA)
is subject to legal challenge. …
‘The Wentworth Group of Concerned Scientists told the Productivity Commission review
that mining exemptions make it difficult to measure the cumulative
impacts of water extraction,
“placing entire groundwater and interconnected surface water systems at risk”. …
‘Environmental Defenders Office Queensland chief executive Jo Bragg said
the community was not given an opportunity to object to the granting of Adani’s water licence.
‘She said the commission’s findings added to pressure on federal Labor
to revoke Adani’s environmental approvals if it wins power.’
Read more of Margaret‘s comprehensive, well-researched & groundbreaking article,
www.greenleft.org.au/content/water-wars-new-front-fight-against-adani
Tax-payer forks out $20,000 for Kimba children to have nuclear propaganda trip to Lucas Heights
Federal Government pays for schoolkids from country SA to go on a nuclear fact-finding tour https://www.adelaidenow.com.au/business/sa-business-journal/federal-government-pays-for-schoolkids-from-country-sa-to-go-on-a-nuclear-factfinding-tour/news-story/4820fe94618442858b517fada6b3f5a8, Erin Jones, Regional Reporter, The Advertiser, 21 June 18
AUSTRALIAN taxpayers are forking out nearly $20,000 to send Kimba school students on an all-expenses paid, five-night excursion to Sydney to learn about radioactive waste.
SA Senator Rex Patrick believes the trip is to “schmooze” families ahead of an August 20 ballot to determine whether the town should host a national nuclear waste facility.
The Federal Government will also gauge community support in Hawker, in the Flinders Ranges, with Wallerberdina Station as the other possible location for the low-level waste facility.
This week’s excursion by 16 students to Adelaide for two nights and then on the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (ANSTO), in the southern Sydney suburb of Lucas Heights, follows a fully-funded trip by 17 Quorn students in April.
Senator Patrick said the money being spent by the Department of Industry, Innovation and Science for the trips highlighted the site-selection process being a “sham”.
“My view is that the department … will do everything and anything to improve community sentiment by schmoozing the locals,” the Centre Alliance politician told The Advertiser.
“This is about understanding what will be in their backyard and I’m sympathetic to that effort, but it crosses a line when you move from informing to schmoozing.”
The government dismissed claims the trip was to influence the ballot outcomes and said each community proposed the excursions to educate students on career opportunities.
National Radioactive Waste Management Facility Taskforce principal adviser Bruce Wilson said the excursions were for children to get “insights” into the types of jobs in the industry.
“The Kimba Economic Working Group saw the success of the (Quorn) excursion and requested something similar for their area,” Mr Wilson said.
Kimba consultative committee independent convener Allan Suter said some 15,000 people visit ANSTO each year and the students had as much of a right to the opportunity as others, “probably more so given the conversation the community is currently in”.
“This is a school excursion that was endorsed by the school and will assist children to understand both nuclear research and types of jobs that would come alongside a radioactive waste management industry,” Mr Suter said.
“Jobs can be pretty hard to come by in our area.
“These kids are aged between 15 and 18, which is a key time you are thinking about your future career.
“Should Kimba have this facility, we want our kids to be in the best position to work towards jobs created by it, or in the flow-on contracts, or in the research the facility enables.”
An itinerary by school principal Anne Moyle said all flights, travel, accommodation and meals, including a dinner cruise, had been paid for by the department.
As well as the excursion, ANSTO staff have visited the schools to talk about nuclear science and its applications.
ANSTO chief nuclear officer Hef Griffiths said: “We are there to answer questions about what it’s like working at a nuclear facility, how safety is assured, the medicine we produce and why, agricultural research and the like.”
A Senate Inquiry into the government’s site-selection process highlighted landowners, traditional owners, community members, neighbours and stakeholders had all visited ANSTO.
The Advertiser last week revealed a private company said it had support for the nuclear repository to be built in Leonora, in Western Australia.
Minister for Resources Matt Canavan said any landowner was free to nominate a site until the final selection was made however, “the government will not be progressing detailed assessment of other nominations until the results of the votes in the two South Australian communities are known”.
Minister Matt Canavan lies on ABC radio, about having “broad community support” for nuclear waste dump sites
Katrina Bohr No Nuclear Waste Dump Anywhere in South Australia https://www.facebook.com/groups/1314655315214929/, An interview with Matt Canavan, near the end. His flexible term of broad community support for a nuclear waste facility is quoted in the Australian-‘There is already broad community support for three South Australian properties.’This is news to those communities. Another example of the flawed process.http://www.abc.net.au/radio/adelaide/programs/breakfast/breakfast/9862826
Community Benefit Programme – essential (?bribery) part of push for nuclear waste dump for Flinders Ranges
Projects near possible nuclear sites receive funding, SA sites earmarked as possible nuclear waste facility sites have received $4 million in funding for various community projects Stock Journal
PROJECTS near Kimba and Wallerberdina Station, which have been earmarked as possible nuclear waste facility sites, will receive $4 million through new National Radioactive Waste Management Facility Community Benefit Programme grants.
Minister for Resources and Northern Australia Matt Canavan said 45 projects had been awarded funding.
“These communities, presently being consulted about hosting a National Radioactive Waste Management Facility, were invited to submit applications for projects that will deliver social and economic benefits to their area,” Mr Canavan said……
“Two sites in Kimba and one at Wallerberdina Station volunteered to host the facility, and are presently in a detailed community and technical assessment process. The Community Benefit Programme is a key part of the process.” …https://www.stockjournal.com.au/story/5336159/projects-near-possible-nuclear-sites-receive-funding/?cs=4861
Support for climate action is rising in Australia: but are politicians listening?
Lowy Institute Poll shows Australians’ support for climate action at its highest level in a decade , The Conversation Associate Professor of International Relations, The University of Queensland,
The annual Lowy Institute Poll on Australian attitudes to the world and global issues for 2018 has been released. Among a series of interesting findings, one thing is clear: support for climate action and renewable energy continue to grow.
In response to the survey’s questions on climate and energy, 59% of respondents agreed with the statement: “climate change is a serious and pressing problem. We should begin taking steps now even if this involves significant costs.”
This represents an increase of 5 percentage points from 2017, and a consistent increase in support for this statement over the past six years. It suggests that support for climate action in Australia is bouncing back towards its high point of 68% in the first set of Lowy Polls in 2006.
What’s more, while the federal government doggedly pursues a “technology-neutral” energy policy, Australians don’t seem to be buying it. Public support for a large-scale energy transition in Australia is even more emphatic than support for climate action.
According to the Lowy poll, which involved a nationally representative sample of 1,200 adults, 84% of Australians support the statement that “the government should focus on renewables, even if this means we may need to invest more in infrastructure to make the system more reliable”.
This is a staggering verdict, one that casts a shadow over Australia’s rising greenhouse emissions and the looming Commonwealth-state negotiations over the National Energy Guarantee.
Both figures suggest that most Australians are genuinely concerned about climate change, a finding consistent with the ever-growing scientific consensus.
The big question is: will Australia’s political leaders respond to this support for climate action and energy transition by putting legitimate policy in place?
It’s political
Two key impediments present themselves here, both political.
The first is Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull’s own party……..
In May, a Senate inquiry into the national security implications of climate change concluded that it represents a clear and present danger to Australian security. The Lowy poll suggests that the public endorses this sentiment – Australians ranked climate change as a more pressing threat than cyber attacks, foreign interference, or the rise of China.
Read more: Senate report: climate change is a clear and present danger to Australia’s security
While some Australian politicians are steadfast in their support for coal, despite the questionable economics, mainstream financial institutions and even energy companies like AGL are shifting away from fossil fuels. Far from economic considerations preventing climate action, as they seemed to in the 1990s, the economy might just be starting to drive that action.
The climate message, in short, seems to be reaching the Australian people. But will it get to those we’ve elected to represent us? https://theconversation.com/lowy-institute-poll-shows-australians-support-for-climate-action-at-its-highest-level-in-a-decade-98625
Australian Medical Association urges fixing the uranium-polluted water supplies to remote communities
Filtering out heavy metals years away, despite high uranium detected in water, ABC News , By Bridget Brennan, Isabella Higgins and Stephanie Zillman, -20 June 18
The Northern Territory Government has downplayed concern following the ABC’s revelation that drinking water has been high in uranium in three Aboriginal communities for a decade — even as the Power and Water Corporation said a plan to filter heavy metals was still years away.
Key points:
- Earlier this week ABC revealed at least three Central Australian communities have uranium levels in drinking water that exceed health guidelines
- The NT Health Minister has now responded, saying the NT Health Department and Power and Water were working together on the issue
- But medical professionals said the situation was “unacceptable”
The response came as the Australian Medical Association urged the water supplies be fixed, with Aboriginal health organisations describing the situation as “unacceptable”.
On Tuesday, ABC’s 7.30 revealed the central desert communities of Laramba, Wilora and Willowra supplied bore water with elevated levels of uranium.
Data from the Power and Water Corporation showed Laramba’s water supply contained uranium at higher than 0.04 milligrams per litre (mg/L).
Australian Drinking Water Guidelines outline those levels should not exceed 0.017 mg/L — and the corporation agreed that several communities are drinking water above the national guidelines.
Yet the Power and Water Corporation said a plan to filter out elevated levels of heavy metals like uranium from drinking water in some Central Australian communities is still years away……….
Doctors said fixing the supply should be a priority.
“Contaminants which do make the drinking water unsafe to drink above the guidelines as stipulated, should be treated as a health priority,” AMA president Dr Tony Bartone said.
“All governments — of either jurisdiction — need to ensure that all Australians have access to potable drinking water.”
Dr Bartone said the AMA wanted safe drinking water levels to be part of the Closing the Gap targets, which are currently undergoing a review after 10 years of limited progress.
“Access to safe drinking water is a prerequisite for good health,” he said.
“You can’t really set aspirational targets for health without really pinning the strategy to the building blocks around good health — the social determinants of health.”
John Paterson, chief executive of the Aboriginal Medical Services Alliance Northern Territory, said an independent review was needed “as soon as possible”.
“Governments need to respond to this, we need the experts out there to explain how much contamination is in the water and what solutions have been provided,” he said.
Rod Little, co-chair of National Congress of Australia’s First Peoples, said he was shocked to hear of uranium levels not meeting health guidelines in Aboriginal communities. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-06-20/high-uranium-detected-in-central-australian-bore-water/9891522
Liberal Coalition attacks on the ABC will rebound against them
James Cogan’s speech at Sydney rally to free Julian Assange
Constant attacks on the ABC will come back to haunt the Coalition government The Conversation Senior Research Fellow in the Centre for Advancing Journalism, University of Melbourne,
In January 1931, as the newly elected United Australia Party government of Joseph Lyons was contemplating the establishment of a national broadcasting service, the prime minister received a deputation of prominent Melburnians, including a barrister and member of the Victorian parliament, Robert Gordon Menzies.
They urged that the new broadcasting service “be organised on an independent basis and that cultural potentialities of the Broadcast Service be considered a matter of primary importance”. The broadcast service came to be named the Australian Broadcasting Commission and went to air for the first time on July 1 1932.
It is a measure of how far today’s Liberal Party has drifted away from the values and ideals of its founder, Menzies, that last Saturday its federal council should have resoundingly adopted a motion that the ABC should be privatised.
One of the proponents of the motion was Mitchell Collier, the federal vice-president of the Young Liberals. He said there was no economic case to keep the broadcaster in public hands.
No economic case. Where the ABC is concerned, that is a false premise on which to proceed. The ABC was explicitly not established for economic purposes or in pursuit of an economic ideology. It was established for social, educational and cultural purposes.
It was also established on an explicitly non-commercial basis: it takes no advertising. Why? Because it was believed advertising would weaken its independence. The policymakers of the 1930s had seen only too clearly how beholden the newspaper proprietors of the day had become to commercial imperatives: the demands of advertisers and the pressure to increase circulation, even at the cost of editorial quality and integrity.
The newspapers of the day had also become mouthpieces for sectional interests. In Melbourne, The Argus stood for the interests of the mercantile classes and conservative political causes; The Age for a kind of Protestant liberalism and social justice. It supported the miners at Eureka.
The bipartisan political vision for the ABC was that it should not be vulnerable to sectional interests or commercial pressures, but should exist to serve the public interest in the widest sense.
The first paragraph of its charter captures the essence of these expectations:………
A motion to privatise the ABC, no matter how vigorously repudiated by the government, is political poison, especially in regional, rural and remote Australia.
These voters have watched as the Abbott-Turnbull administrations have cut the ABC’s funding by $338 million since 2014. They have watched as the ABC has been used – in Guthrie’s words yesterday – as a punching bag by narrow political, commercial or ideological interests
Guthrie was too diplomatic to nail the government or the Murdoch press. But the overt hostility to the ABC shown by the government over the past four years may now reap a political harvest.
That hostility has been demonstrated not only by the funding cuts but by sustained carping criticisms, vexatious complaints and political stunts exemplified by the current competitive neutrality inquiry.
It would be more accurately called the editorial neutering inquiry. Its focus is clearly on the ABC news service, as its own issues paper makes clear. That is the part of the ABC most detested by the government and the politician for whom the government is a cat’s paw in this, Pauline Hanson.
Each Tuesday, I engage in a pro-bono 25-minute segment on media issues with the presenter of ABC Radio Statewide Drive, Nicole Chvastek. The program is broadcast across regional Victoria and southern New South Wales, covering the National seats of Riverina, Mallee, Murray and Gippsland, and the Liberal seats of Farrer, Wannon, McMillan, Corangamite and McEwen.
Yesterday the talkback calls ran hot on this one issue: privatisation of the ABC. Yes, the ABC needed scrutiny; yes, the ABC was a bunch of lefties. But: where would we be without it?
Just after 5pm, the Nationals served up their deputy leader, the Victorian senator Bridget McKenzie, to answer talkback calls on this issue. It was like something from the Colosseum. https://theconversation.com/constant-attacks-on-the-abc-will-come-back-to-haunt-the-coalition-government-98456?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Latest%20from%20The%20Conversation%20for%20June%2021%202018%20-%20104619234&utm_content=Latest%
UK Should Reject Extraditing Julian Assange to USA
https://www.hrw.org/news/2018/06/19/uk-should-reject-extraditing-julian-assange-us Faces Possible Indictment under Outdated Espionage Act Dinah PoKempner General Counsel
It has been six years since Julian Assange, founder of Wikileaks, fled to the Ecuadorean Embassy in London to seek asylum from possible extradition to the United States to face indictment under the US Espionage Act.
At the time, Assange, an Australian national, was wanted by Sweden for questioning over sexual offense allegations. Assange had also broken the terms of his UK bail. Since then, he has become even more controversial, having published US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s emails and internal emails from Democratic Party officials.
While some admire and others despise Assange, no one should be prosecuted under the antiquated Espionage Act for publishing leaked government documents. That 1917 statute was designed to punish people who leaked secrets to a foreign government, not to the media, and allows no defense or mitigation of punishment on the basis that public interest served by some leaks may outweigh any harm to national security.
The US grand jury investigation of Assange under the Espionage Act was apparently based on his publishing the leaks for which Chelsea Manning, a former US army soldier, was convicted. Her sentence was commuted.
The publication of leaks—particularly leaks that show potential government wrongdoing or human rights abuse—is a critical function of a free press in a democratic society. The vague and sweeping provisions of the Espionage Act remain ready to be used against other publishers and journalists, whether they be Wikileaks or the New York Times.
Assange has agreed to surrender himself to the British police – but only if he were granted assurances against extradition to the US, where he could face life in prison. He also offered to appear in Sweden if Sweden would offer similar assurances.
In 2016, the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention found Assange’s stay in the Ecuadorean embassy, enforced by the alternative of his potential extradition to the US, to be an arbitrary deprivation of liberty. Ecuador, offended by Assange’s political comments, this year has denied him internet access and visitors, other than occasional contact with his lawyers. Ecuador denied Human Rights Watch permission to visit him this May. Concern is growing over his access to medical care. His asylum is growing more difficult to distinguish from detention.
The UK has the power to resolve concerns over his isolation, health, and confinement by removing the threat of extradition for publishing newsworthy leaks. It should do so before another year passes.
Data ethics heavily influenced by the biases of well-off white males
If the recent Cambridge Analytica data scandal has taught us anything, it’s that the ethical cultures of our largest tech firms need tougher scrutiny.
But moral questions about what data should be collected and how it should be used are only the beginning. They raise broader questions about who gets to make those decisions in the first place.
We currently have a system in which power over the judicious and ethical use of data is overwhelmingly concentrated among white men. Research shows that the unconscious biases that emerge from a person’s upbringing and experiences can be baked into technology, resulting in negative consequences for minority groups.
These biases are difficult to shed, which makes workplace diversity a powerful and necessary tool for catching unsuspected bias before it has a chance to cause damage. As the impact of data-driven algorithms and decisions grows more profound, we need to ask: how is this going to change in the future?
Unfortunately, the indicators suggest the answer is: not much.
What consequences are we talking about?
Algorithmic bias is now a widely studied problem that refers to how human biases creep into the decisions made by computers.
The problem has led to gendered language translations, biased criminal sentencing recommendations, and racially skewed facial recognition systems.
For example, when an automated translation tool such as Google Translate is required to translate a gender-neutral language (such as Turkish) into a gender-specific one (such as English) it makes a guess as to which gender to assign to the translated text.
Launch of film “protecting Country”
Protecting Country
Alexander Hayes After three years of listening, a huge trip across country, countless hours spent editing and many community consultations we are thankful to be releasing today the Protecting Country film which was produced by Bruce Hammond and features Aboriginal leaders in their stand against the continued genocide of uranium mining, testing and dumping in Australia –
“…Protecting Country is an independently produced film bringing the voices of the contemporary Adnyamathanha, Gurindji, Tanganekald, Yankunytjatjara Anunga, Mirning, Narunnga Aboriginal Australian people forward who are united in their stand AGAINST the present and planned uranium mining and nuclear dump activities in South Australia. Bruce Hammond, an Aboriginal Tanganekald man with ties to the coast in the lower South East of South Australia and the central desert regions of Finke and Alice Springs in conjunction with Alexander Hayes & Magali McDuffie from Ngikalikarra Media brought the ‘Protecting Country’ documentary film on a screening road trip across Australia –
A Quorn resident disgusted at the hypocritical dump site process by Dept of Industry, Innovation and Science
Dave Fergusson Submission TO THE SENATE STANDIN COMMITTEE ON ECONOMICS SENATE ENQUIRY SUBMISSION FOR THE SELECTION PROCESS FOR A NATIONAL RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT FACILITY IN SOUTH AUSTRALIA (Submission No 106)
My name is Dave Fergusson. I grew up in Port Adelaide and from the moment I learnt to drive I have been coming up to Flinders Ranges for camping holidays and for work ever since until I decided to move to Quorn about sixteen years ago. I am absolutely disgusted at the way in which this push by the Department (DIIS) to find a site for a National Radioactive Waste Management Facility (NRWMF) has been conducted from day one. Please find below a few of my reasons.
1/ Land nomination of Wallerberdina Station. The first that I heard of a waste dump being 
proposed in the Flinders Ranges was when I was in Adelaide Hospital in December 2015. After making several enquiries as to where it was to be proposed to be built it was found to be an Ex-Senator from South Australia, Mr Grant Chapman who co-owned this property Wallerberdina. This man has not ever lived in the area nor on the property and was a deputy chairman on the Lucus Heights Waste Management Board back in the late nineties. He did not consult with any of his neighbours about his nomination of this station to get away from the designated use of the land. IE. Pastoral. Had he have been establishing a tourist venture or a quandong farm on his property, this could have been put down to an oversite on his behalf. But a nuclear waste dump !!!. Even the aboriginal people whose connections to this area go back for thousands of years were not consulted. When I spoke to DIIS in 2016 I was told it was purely coincidence that Mr Chapman just happened to have all this information regarding a NRWMF and had nothing whatsoever to do with the nomination of the property.!!!
2/ The Need To Determine Broad Community Support During the early consultation days when the DIIS staff would come over here, it appeared as if they were not able to answer any of my more pertinent questions and would fob me off. There appeared to be a light feel to the sales spin and if we didn’t hurry up, then someone else could end up getting it. No one I talked to could understand why any one would want to put a waste dump in the Flinders. As no notes were ever taken at these informal meetings there would have been no record of names of who would attend or what their concerns were, especially if the concern was asking deeper and more meaning full questions.
When the radioactive waste at Woomera was discovered leaching into the ground, DIIS staff glossed over it saying this is why we need a NRWMF. If it’s at Woomera leaking all over the place and DIIS, ANSTO, CSIRO and ARPANSA, all Government departments, know of its existence then how can we be sure it’s not going to happen again? These Departments and the people who manage them are the ones that we have to put our trust in that they are managing the radioactive waste to the best possible standards. The leaking drums of unknown radioactive strength, some low, some intermediate and some with toxic chemicals are still sitting on site today on top of a concrete pad even though it was reported two years ago. This information has been suppressed to the public by the media and television.
The general public barely know this stuff exists, it will all be swept up and bought to the NRWMF wherever that may be. I don’t believe this is an issue for the communities of Hawker, Quorn and now Kimba to have to decide if we want it or not. It has already been seen that the people don’t want it. So why are they still pushing saying that transparency and openness is paramount!!!
3/ Disunity within the community What has become very noticeable is the fact that this process is splitting communities and families apart. Some who are just driven by the money can not see that waste is forever, money and our lives are not. If this goes ahead it will open up a pandora’s box. Last December 2017 I drove up to a public meeting at Hawker organised by the Hawker Community Development Board (HCDB)and DIIS for them to display several leading doctors to talk on the wonders of nuclear medicine and the life saving procedures that it produces. I waited until the presentation was over and as there were no comments from the public, I stood to ask one of the Doctors a question. I was then told by the convenor that I was not allowed to ask any questions as I did not live in Hawker. So much for openness and transparency. It was a public meeting for members of the public to attend. The Doctor asked me at the close of the meeting what my question was but I was too upset to go further with it. The senior DIIS member there also said afterwards, that it was the HCDB who chaired the meeting and as a result DIIS could not intervene. It is just another example of what I and many others are trying to say that we are being fed just the right amount of information to make us all want to have the NRWMF. They don’t want to listen to professors and doctors of geology who have worked and taught student’s geology in the area saying the proposed location is on a major fault line.
I have been evicted three times now from the Barndioota consultative Committee (BCC) meetings. These are meetings that are supposed to be run by the BCC to inform the general public of whatever information that DIIS want distributed, and concerns that the public have, to be made known to the DIIS. I have always been as unobtrusive as possible and only wished to observe. However, on three occasions it has been DIIS staff who have escorted me out. The openness and transparency just does not appear to be there.
4/ Jobs for the future It has been reported that last Friday, at a talk and dinner function, organised by DIIS at Hawker that an additional thirty new jobs will now be established at the NRWMF. This dinner was by invitation only and the selected few, were able to listen and hear the CEO of ANSTO announce the decision by the minister to create another thirty jobs. This is on top of the fifteen jobs already known about since 2016, to manage exactly the same waste that was coming into the NRWMF the week before the dinner function!!!!. I find this announcement insulting to our intelligence. Watch any documentary on our future and they all say the same thing. Robotics and A.I. will be our future. Its here now in the mining industry. One show on commercial television said “40% of Australian jobs could disappear within the next fifteen years due to robotics and artificial intelligence in the work force.” I wrote this down from the show to put it in here. Also, in the Worksafe book, it states that due to climate change within the next ten years that most outside jobs will be done robotically.
I would like to say thank you to Senator Rex Patrick for giving the concerned public a chance Selection process for a national radioactive waste management facility in South Australia Submission 106 to voice our opinions on this issue. Because I struggle to put my own words down on paper, I would sincerely like to be able to have the opportunity to talk at a Senate Hearing either here, at Adelaide or Canberra. I
Bob Tulloch dissects Australian govt’s nuclear waste dump “community consultation” and finds it dishonest.
It is an easier proposition, supported by the legal framework, to work with small, isolated and vulnerable communities that can be easily manipulated, than to conduct an open an transparent site selection process that engages the broader community.
The constant vernacular of the whole siting process is deliberately ambiguous. For example the use of the phrase ‘65% not opposed’, is often perceived as 65% of the community support the facility.
Bob Tulloch to Senate Standing Committee on Economics Submission for ‐ The selection process for a national radioactive waste management facility in South Australia (Submission No. 87)
Resources Minister Matt Canavan lying to South Australians on nuclear waste. Does he think that we are all fools?
Barb Walker Fight To Stop Nuclear Waste Dump In Flinders Ranges SA, 19 June 18
I’ve just listened to another snow job on ABC 891 and then repeated on ABC 639. Senator Canavan is not telling the truth. He also contradicted statements he made in ‘The Australian’ newspaper this week.
Mr Canavan, your nuclear waste dump does NOT have 65% community support. He has used a figure from a dodgy phone poll that was conducted well over 2 years ago in the Flinders Ranges. Incidentally, that poll only consulted a small percentage of people on fixed phone lines – asking if they would like more information about the process of hosting a nuclear waste facility and so on. Hardly grounds to spruik 65% support, Mr Canavan!
This has been a flawed process every step of the way.
Senator Rex Patrick states, and rightly so;
“RADIOACTIVE WASTE SITE SELECTION = A SHAM”
Here in the Flinders, we have been fighting this proposed dump for over 2 years. Stress levels are through the roof for a lot of people within our communities. People are getting sick, and some are just sick and tired of hearing about it and many wanting the dump to just, go away!
The Australian Radiation Protection And Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA), has stated they will not give a licence to build a nuclear waste facility where there is no community support. Why then are the facts being twisted to suit Mr Canavan? He is still spruiking “hospital waste”. Does he think he is talking to fools? Our communities have done extensive research and we are well informed. Perhaps we know more than he does?
Doesn’t he realise the implications of the ILW sitting in the Flinders for hundreds of years with no forward plans of future repacking and deep underground disposal. Lay your plans on the table, Senator Canavan. Let’s hear it.
If we were to hide valuable information by twisting the truth to suit an outcome that will effect communities for hundreds, if not thousands, of years we would all lose our jobs and probably finish up in jail.
Senator Canavan, if the August vote swings to a ‘NO’ vote will that be seen by you as just, “community sentiment” or does NO actually mean NO ? https://www.facebook.com/groups/344452605899556/
Nuclear waste dumping would destroy Adnyamathanha traditional land and cultural heritage
Heather Mckenzie Stuart Fight To Stop Nuclear Waste Dump In Flinders Ranges SA, 19 June 18
1 This month.
20 September –National Day of Action in Melbourne on the International Day of Peace
Help Aunty Sue Protect Her Land and Sacred Sites From Destructive Rocket Testing.
.
Australians deserve the truth
about
AUKUS – https://aukuspublicinquiry.com/
PETITION – To: Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and the Australian Labor Government
of the week – Australians for War Powers Reform (AWPR)
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity
Antinuclear 