MNEMOSYNE GILES’ powerful submission exposes the deceit in the National Radioactive Waste Management Facility plan
MNEMOSYNE GILES (citizen of South Australia) to Senate Inquiry on Selection process for a national radioactive waste management facility in South Australia (Submission 51)
I submit that the process of selecting a site for a NRWMF has been fundamentally flawed by the fact that it has not been properly or publicly debated whether a NRWM F is an appropriate response to the problem of Australia,s radioactive waste. It is therefore premature to be selecting a site. The inappropriate campaigns of ANSTO and ARPANSA to find a site as soon as possible,(within one year it is suggested) , are part of the misguided nature of their task
I therefore recommend that this Senate Inquiry lead on to a full independent Judicial inquiry into Australia,s radioactive nuclear waste and whether we should keep producing it. I recommend a moratorium on uranium mining should be held while a decision on what to do with the waste is made.
World wide there is no solution to the long lived ILW (Intermediate Level Waste), and this must be acknowledged and emphasised at all levels of discussion and public consultation. Instead of this the NRWMF site selection process has given the illusion that a National site would be a “safe”solution allowing the industry to continue.
- CORRUPTION The Act 2012 that allows nominated private land to become nuclear radioactive dump sites, allowing State prohibition laws to be over-ridden, needs to be examined in connection with the possible corrupt volunteering of land, ………. I recommend an independent inquiry into how and why the National Dump process was initiated,and what interests,(including defence,may have been involved).
An inquiry should ask :why is nuclear radioactive waste at present not better secured at sites such as Woomera where it currently is held? :how”safe” is any storage of ILW? :would one National site be “safer” than more smaller sites,considering that a National site provides a more definite military target and involves the hazards of transport.
2) COLLUSION It needs to be explained how it came to be that the two campaigns for an International dump in S.A. And a National dump were run in parallel during the year of the NFCRC (Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission).
I submit that there was communication and co-operation between State and Federal Govts.or other bodies to keep the two separate. The effect of the concurrent campaigns was to confuse the public : if it was designed to confuse , it succeeded :after the S.A. “Citizen,sJury” rejection of the International dump, most South Australians believed the threat of a “Dump” for S.A. was over.
Now many South , Australians believe that this proposed National dump must be quite different, a smaller proposal,necessary for low level medical waste only. I perceive because I have talked to hundreds of people, handing out information leaflets to passers by on the streets of Adelaide, over the last two years. I submit that the separating of the National and International dump proposals has been and is a deceitful strategy. Well known and influential Richard Yeeles submitted to the NFCRC that a National dump was a good strategy to lead eventually to an International dump. So this strategy is well known to government and industry leaders. But the distinct possibility of a National dump leading to an International dump is never admitted to the public, (especially not to people at Kimba or the Flinders Ranges). This is collusion at a high level to deceive the public. If it is the blind leading the blind it is not good enough when so much is at stake.
3) DECEIT
I also submit that the presentation of medical waste as the main purpose of a National dump is deceitful. Other submissions I am sure will give details of the small proportion of waste which is medical, and the fact that nuclear reactors are not necessary for producing isotopes for medical treatment Nuclear contamination has caused innumerable cancers and will continue to do so. People in contaminated districts can not forget this, but further away people wonder where their cancer comes from.
4) CONFUSION OVER LEVELS OF WASTE In the early stages of the ARPANSA National dump campaign people were led to believe that it was for LLW only. Even politicians seemed to need to have it explained repeatedly that ILW was to be “co-located”.An inquiry should look at bringing Australian definitions of HLW and ILW into conformity with international definitions.
5) BROAD COMMUNITY SUPPORT
Why is the definition of this only now being questioned? For an honest straight forward process it should have been defined at the outset. Leaving it vague has caused uncertainty, confusion, and ultimately angst and division in previously harmonious districts..Whoever decided that small remote townships should be targeted to become willing hosts for the most toxic waste ever produced, and to make a decision which would affect all of us and future generations for thousands of years? South Australian land and people have already suffered contempt and abuse from nuclear /military actions and we will not accept disenfranchisement now. Both State and Federal Govts. (lab and Lib), ape the Finnish with a mantra of “not imposing” on any unwilling community. But this is disingenuous. Finland is a nuclear nation reliant upon nuclear power, so a small local community can have some sense that it is acting in the public interest in hosting a dump. Most Australians do not want Australia to be further implicated in the nuclear fuel cycle:this is probably why we are not being asked about this dump, or given the relevant information. This is not democracy. Finland also has very different geology, with plenty of water and has an absolute veto on the transport of nuclear material across its borders (which we do not have).
This is not a local issue but a National and a State one.
6) FINANCIAL BENEFITS
Small communities are easier targets for bribery and this has been shameless, and benefit to the local community is the most often cited reason for local acceptance. Public money has also been used to fund paid staff to have a constant pro- dump presence in town,and a “local project office” in Kimba. This use of funds means that the pro-dump people in town are supported and can be seen as pillars of the community, positive in attitude, while those against lack funds and support except from volunteers. The current ICAN tour of remote nuclear sites and the target dump sites of Kimba and the Flinders Ranges , is in response to this isolation. ARPANSA has not and does not intend to appear in Adelaide to explain what they are presenting to Kimba and the Flinders communities. I recommend that they should complete an inventory of what is intended before people can be expected to consider the proposal
7) INSUFFICIENT INFORMATION
This is the most serious defect of the ARPANSA campaign. Target communities of Kimba and the Flinders Ranges are being asked to make a decision on a project that is not described or defined. Attached is an appendix of questions asked of ARPANSA . After a year most of these questions are still not answered satisfactorily .They are basic questions about the waste and the need for an
8) PERCEPTION OF “SAFETY”
All the local people who accept the dump proposal think that it is “safe”,although they do not know what it actually would or could be.(none of us do , it is an open ended process it seems). This is a result of ARPANSAs campaign to create a “perception “of “safety”, an example of which was their hosting of a French pro-nuclear delegation from the Aube. The mayor and others told locals at Kimba and the Flinders ranges how they felt comfortable living and producing near a nuclear waste store, and how tourists flocked to see it. No mention was made of France,s terrible problem with ist waste. When asked about the tritium that leaked(irreversibly) into the water system it was explained that this was only because the facility originally did not have a roof. So contamination and accidents belong to the past, and are not expected in the thousands of years of future storage.
9) MANIPULATION
“In its pursuit of a “willing community”within a year, ARPANSA is manufacturing consent in the same way as the S.A. NFCRC tried to do with its accompanying Road Show”, and the Citizens Jury. The techniques are quite usual nowdays but I submit they are inappropriate for major decision making. They include: -No genuine public meetings ie. No independent chair -Casual style consultation instead, with individuals usually addressed in ones or twos – -low attendance at ARPANSA consultations is normal, similar to roadshow”attendances -questions from the floor usually relegated to private discussion after the meeting.
In conclusion I submit that the site selection process shows pro-nuclear bias and avoids democratic scrutiny. Therefore an inquiry by the Senate into the process should not only condemn the process,but ask for a judicial inquiry into its inception and the basic assumptions it makes about Australia,s further nuclear involvement
. Mnemosyne Giles 2/4/2018
APPENDIX:
Further questions to ANSTO, ARPANSA & the DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRY, INNOVATION and SCIENCE (DIIS) from ENuFF (Everybody for a Nuclear Free Future SA) Continue reading
Sydney’s Opal nuclear reactor’s High Level Wastes off to France, later to return to planned Federal Nuclear waste Dump
Guarded nuclear shipment to secretly depart Sydney SBS News, 1 June 18 Any day now a decade’s worth of heavily guarded nuclear cargo will be secretly transported through Sydney’s 
streets and sent to France for reprocessing. ….. Any day now a decade’s worth of spent nuclear fuel assemblies weighing 24 tonnes will be moved out of Sydney’s Lucas Heights facility in a highly sensitive transport mission months in the making.
specific timing of the operation remain classified with the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (ANSTO) only disclosing it will happen mid-year.An ANSTO spokesman has assured the public of the operation’s safety, saying the radioactive materials will be enclosed in specially-designed transport casks reinforced with lead and made to withstand almost anything, including a jet fighter crash.
“There is no credible chance of any accident or incident that could result in the cask being compromised,” an ANSTO spokesman said.
It will be the 10th transport mission of spent nuclear fuel assemblies, with the last shipment sent to the United States in 2009.
The spent fuel has come from Australia’s multi-purpose OPAL reactor…..The reprocessing project will cost $45 million, including the contract with France, equipment, staff and other costs.
Once the uranium and plutonium are extracted, they will be recycled into overseas civil power and research programs, with the remaining materials vitrified into a safer form for waste storage and sent back to Australia…..
The spent fuel assemblies, which would have been considered high-level waste, become transformed into an intermediate level waste, Hef Griffiths, ANSTO’s Chief Nuclear Officer told AAP.
But the question of where it will be stored remains.
The waste from this year’s transport mission will be returned from France in many years’ time and sent to the yet-to-be-built National Radioactive Waste Management Facility where it will be kept in storage for several decades.
Eventually, the waste will need to be moved again to a permanent disposal facility. https://www.sbs.com.au/news/guarded-nuclear-shipment-to-secretly-depart-sydney
Leanne Lienert not necessarily opposed to nuclear waste dump, but very critical of the process
There are far too many discrepancies in the information, consultation process and long term impacts to have such a facility based at Kimba (or Hawker).
the consultation process has been an insult to the intelligence of rural people.
Leanne Lienert Submission to Senate, re National Radioactive Waste Management 
Facility in South Australia Submission (Submission No. 50) I wish to offer my thoughts to the process currently occurring within two regional areas of South Australia with an emphasis on the Kimba area. From the outset I wish to say that I am not opposed entirely to such a facility being built within South Australia – but I am extremely concerned about the process of consultation, the logisitics and location of such a site and the long term effects on vibrant farming/rural communities.
Financial Compensation interestingly the offer of substantial money to individuals to offer up their land plus the supposed ongoing dollars is the driving force locally for the facility to be placed at Kimba. Kimba farming district, as all farms across the world, are being farmed by fewer people as technology and modern machinery changes farming practices. It also often means that individual farmers are buying up more and more land for their own needs as smaller farmers can’t compete. Interestingly those buying up land are also the ones now edging to gain financially from this current waste facility proposal. I read one article where a farmer who has offered his farm considers it will drought proof the Kimba District to have the $2 million dollars – This amount of money divided between those affected by a drought would be chicken feed where the costs each year to produce a crop is significant. This community is not poor – it is creative and community minded with little unemployment. Nowadays many young people gain a trade to supplement the farms where they live and work – and as happens across the world others gravitate to the cities
While this money is a huge enticement, logically, the big picture cost of transporting radioactive waste from all over Australia to a small rural community doesn’t seem to be discussed in the consultation! If this waste is as safe as promised why is there a need to move it such long distances when it could presumably be located closer to the source with smaller facilities within each state or shared states?
“Broad community support” –how has it played out currently and will continue into the future I spent my childhood up until early adult years in this vibrant rural community where community participation, comradery, innovation and support has always been paramount. I still have a brother and his family on the farm plus my mother. I specifically know people who have been affected on both sides by this whole process and it is beyond me with the ongoing extent of the consultation that this disconnection and destruction of the community fabric has not been the deciding factor in saying this location is inappropriate on so many levels – socially, emotionally and mentally. It is sad that locally and politically at a Federal level that the lure of money (greed) has risen to hold such a high position in exchange for a totally altered community ethos!
This process has divided the community to such an extent that (people I know well)
- – sporting teams have been affected because people will not play with those of differing opinion.
- – people have moved out of Kimba because they no longer feel comfortable in long term friendship groups who are now split by differing opinions
- – people do not patronise business who are known to have opposite views to each other e.g. supermarkets, coffee shop, cafe – a distrust of information given to support the facility
- – queries that there is too much wider information that has not been disclosed or has been misleading e.g. the locations were deliberately local farm names or Hundred names to disguise it not being at Kimba – such as Pinkawillinie, enticements to visit Lucas Heights in an attempt to ‘prove’ and market how safe it is while choosing to locate it so far away in a rural community, and also emotionally tagging people who are against it insinuating that they will have xrays or nuclear medicine treatments and are therefore hypocrites to not support it.
- – voting for the facility only included those in the Kimba District
- – interestingly a farmer who borders a proposed property and who is opposed to the waste facility idea is in the next council area and he didn’t get a say – I consider this an injustice. Even to the extent that he was told that it wasn’t ‘adjacent’ because it was across the other side of a dirt road – I wonder if the same person on a city block would think this was fair if a facility was built on a vacant block over the road from them!!
- – A person I know very well owns a sheep stud – he has chosen not to disclose his own opinion of the facility for a real fear that those with an opposite view will not by rams from his stud.
- – The need to remain neutral has caused some tensions between a son and mother (who is opposed to the facility) for fear he will be linked publicly to her views and it will reflect on his business and therefore affect those who patronise him.
- – The notion that many jobs will be created also doesn’t ring true
- – with a world of fly-in, fly-out employment it doesn’t seem logical that many jobs would be permanently located at Kimba. – I have heard locals say it will attract tourists!!
- – what would they see? How big will this facility actually be?
- – What is the impact to transport this type of waste such long distances through populated areas all across Australia to some tiny area on Eyre Peninsular?
- – again if it is so safe why haven’t areas much closer to the source of radioactive waste been considered? It doesn’t seem to make logical sense?
Broad Community Support
- – what does this mean? Initially it was promised that any opposition to such a facility would mean it wouldn’t go ahead. The goal posts changed dramatically in a short space of time so that a vote with a slim majority of 2-3% meant the second round of consultation went ahead and if this continues it’s possible that as few as 300 people will make the decision for all of South Australia to have such a facility here. Is it a fair process if there is not a majority of at least 70:30 to allow this facility to go ahead especially in a decision that has an ongoing impact for many generations to come in terms of governance, changing definitions of “medium’ levels of waste, possible mishaps etc. Community Benefits Program
- – If community benefits programs were to eventuate I am wondering how this would happen constructively in a community divided by the process – will the damage created continue to foster antagonism in gaining support for initiatives?
- – Who would manage the money within the community and how would allocation of funds be decided? Would it be at a local level or would it become a political football?
- – How would such a small community have a voice in changing political processes into the future?
- – Would ‘medium level’ waste alter as the years go on? How would this be guaranteed and trusted?
Eyre Peninsular and state wide considerations
– The wider implications of a radioactive waste facility being located within a vibrant grain growing area and its impact on a clean and green agricultural area cannot be dismissed.
This issue is not just for this productive region but all of the Eyre Peninsular and South Australia as a whole therefore the consultation needs to be widened and include both the region and the state in any final considerations. – I feel that the whole economic impact area needs some dialogue and debate because once this process begins it cannot be reversed. – In a country where the greatest population and food growing areas are positioned relatively close to the coast it doesn’t seem logical to locate such a facility in an area known for its quality and quantity of agricultural produce – there is a massive land mass that could be utilised instead of impacting on a small vibrant farming district.
Other related matters
I wonder why (and would like to see the reasons ‘why not’) places such as Leigh Creek (already exposed areas that could be covered within the open cut mine areas to the degree needed), Roxby Downs (already radioactive, with large areas that could house such a facility with easy access via rail or road), Woomera (where the government already utilises vast areas of land and with ready access) or even the Defence Force land at El Alamein near Port Augusta (where the area extends all the way to Iron Knob) – because once again it is promoted as being extremely safe.
In conclusion, after following the progress of the consultation in the Kimba district over the last two years, I feel that there are far too many discrepancies in the information, consultation process and long term impacts to have such a facility based at Kimba (or Hawker).
I also feel that the consultation process has been an insult to the intelligence of rural people. That it was considered (especially in the earlier parts of the consultation), this was one small, insignificant community who could be bluffed/lured into such a facility with money and would really have no idea about radioactive waste and probably wouldn’t care!
If South Australia decides to take on the responsibility of a radioactive waste facility then I hope that this enquiry can honour the true spirit that makes a rural community flourish and not set up processes that will continue to drive wedges between its people in the name of money. Please find a place that does not interrupt genuine people who lives are entwined with the land – whether that be our Aboriginal people, farmers or country towns.
Japanese companies join in starting storage battery business in South Australia
TEPCO JV to enter Australia battery biz
http://the-japan-news.com/news/article/0004473933May 30, 2018
TOKYO (Jiji Press) — Jera Co., a joint venture between Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings Inc. and Chubu Electric Power Co., said Tuesday that it will enter storage battery business in Australia.
The thermal power and fuel company agreed to explore opportunities to deploy energy storage solutions in the Asia-Pacific region with Australian power company Lyon Group and Fluence Energy LLC, a U.S. storage battery maker partly held by German industrial giant Siemens AG.
Under their plan, the three companies will spend a total of ¥120 billion to build solar power plants equipped with lithium-ion batteries in three regions in Australia.
Their combined power generation capacities will reach some 550,000 kilowatts.
One of the power plants will be built in South Australia. It will have a 100,000-kilowatt battery system, one of the largest in the world.
The generated electricity will be sold locally. The companies aim to start running the power plants in 2019.
Jera expects to invest around ¥10 billion. The company hopes to learn know-how about the storage battery business, as the renewable energy market is forecast to expand.
South Australian Parliament Bill to protect whistleblowers
SA parliament to debate whistleblower laws https://www.news.com.au/national/breaking-news/sa-parliament-to-debate-whistleblower-laws/news-story/8f7d5ba0d9a0fba3619d027096423c6c
A law shielding South Australian journalists from liability for refusing to reveal their sources has passed state parliament’s lower house.
Laws to strengthen protection of whistleblowers have passed South Australia’s lower house of parliament.
The Liberal government on Wednesday passed legislation to shield journalists from criminal or civil liability if they do not disclose the identity of their sources when the information is in the public interest.
The proposed legislation would make the default rule that journalists cannot be compelled to answer a question or produce a document that may disclose the identity of an informant.
No clear meaning of “broad community support” – the fatal flaw in Australian government’s push to impose a nuclear waste dump
Brian Cant Elected member District Council of Kimba, Submission RE: SITE SELECTION PROCESS FOR A NATIONAL RADIOCTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT FACILITY IN SOUTH AUSTRALIA (Submission no. 49)
(b) How the need for ‘broad community support” has played and will continue to play a part
in the process
The definition of “broad community Support” has consistently been one of the most significant points of contention since the NRWMF project was announced, not just in Kimba, but from every corner of Australia.
One constant throughout the process has been criticism from both sides about a lack of clarity from the Department about how ”broad community support” would be defined, and subsequently measured, during the consultation process.
As a result, this uncertainty has exacerbated community angst on what was already an
emotive subject. It is possible that the community stress could have been either minimised or
avoided altogether had the Department identified defining “broad community support” as a
project priority from the outset.
Adnyamathanha Traditional Land Association again confronts Resources Minister Matt Canavan on nuclear waste dumping
AdnyamathanhaTraditional Land Association (ATLA) RNTBC Email ceo@atla.com.au ICN 3734 ABN 14 146 238 567 PO Box 4014 Port Augusta 5700 Ph 0429900222 29/5/2018
To. Minister Canavan PO Box 6100 Senate Parliament House Canberra ACT 2600
per email senator.canavan@aph.gov.au Minister Canavan [Minister.Canavan@industry.gov.au]
Dear Minister
I again write to you with regards to your departments treatment of ATLA.
I have already stated on numerous occasions, ATLA is the prescribed body corporate in terms ofour Native Title and we are an Aboriginal Regional Authority with the State Government and recognised as the peak organisation with regards to any heritage issues in our area. We are the representative body for Adnyamathanha people.
However, your department continues to use divide and conquer tactics with regards to the nuclear waste dump in our land.
We raised very grave concerns in relation to the Heritage Assessment and we had no choice but to pull out of this very early in the process. We have no faith in the process or the assessment and we will not accept any findings from this flawed non-inclusive process.
You visited our land recently and didn’t even contact ATLA.
It is not true that Bruce Wilson tried to contact me, I have had no communication with him in relation to your visit. The first I knew about you being here was when I was told you were meeting with individual Adnyamathanha people at Mamma Lou’s café in Port Augusta, that is only about 500 metres from my office in Port Augusta! You then added to the insult by entering our land with no contact with us.
I call on you as Minister to tell the truth and remove these lies from your website.
ATLA is a vital part of this whole process we are the Traditional Owners and we say NO!
Now you are going to hold some sort of vote for the people who live very close to Wallerberdina, however, this is Adnyamathanha land and ALL Adnyamathanha people must get the chance to vote.
I demand you include all Adnyamathanha people who are on the electoral roll in this vote!
This process has been flawed from the start, you continue to ignore our concerns and opposition to this dump and the very least you can do is include us in the vote. I believe there are at least 1500 Adnyamathanha people eligible to vote.
This is our land, ATLA is the peak body, show us respect as the Traditional Owners.
Please take action on this matter with some urgency and include Adnyamathanha people in the vote.
Yours sincerely
Vince Coulthard, CEO
Australians trust Labor more than Liberals, on energy policy
Labor trusted more on energy: Newspoll https://au.news.yahoo.com/labor-trusted-more-energy-newspoll-190748195–spt.html
More voters trust Labor to deliver lower power prices and secure supply than the coalition, despite the Turnbull government’s National Energy Guarantee policy, a Newspoll shows.
The poll shows 39 per cent trust Labor, 37 per cent back the coalition, while 24 per cent remain uncommitted to keep prices down and secure supply, the Newspoll conducted for The Australian showed.
It comes as the federal government has pushed its NEG while facing mutiny in the partyroom over coal-fired power stations, such as Liddell.
The poll was conducted between May 24-27 and covered 1591 voters across regional areas and the major cities.
We’re on the frontline defending our lands against Adani
‘We the leaders of the Wangan and Jagalingou Traditional Owners.
We are the Traditional Owners of the land where mining giant Adani want to build the Carmichael coal mine.
‘Our people have said no four times to a miserly land deal offered by Adani in exchange for the destruction of our homelands. We have been opposing Adani and holding them off since 2012.
‘Our resistance has nothing to do with dollars. No amount of money or promises from a deceitful corporation can stop us standing strong in defence of Wangan and Jagalingou lands and waters and sacred sites.
‘But Adani are ruthless. They have used the dirtiest tactics to undermine our right to say no, and manufacture a phony “Indigenous Land Use Agreement”.
‘Right now we’re fighting against Adani’s shoddy tactics and their sham “agreement” in court.
The judge could hand down a decision any day now. But it won’t end there.
‘Can you sign our petition to stand with us against Adani?
‘We are willing to fight Adani all the way to the High Court to protect our environment and sacred sites.
We are working for a positive future for our people on our country. We won’t stand by and watch its destruction for coal.
‘Adani are relentlessly pressuring the Queensland government to clear our Native Title rights out of the way — and as the clock ticks and Adani gets more desperate, it will only intensify.
‘So we need to show Adani and our Governments that they can’t fake or force our consent.
‘We have never given our consent to Adani to destroy our country, and we never will.
Our land is our living law; we are connected to it through our ancestors and our culture. Without it we will cease to exist as a people.
‘Our people have been leading a courageous fight against a cashed-up mining giant with politicians in its pockets, and top end of town lawyers to argue away its collusion, bad faith and dishonesty.
‘We’re calling time on this. It’s time for Adani to walk away.
‘Sign our petition to tell Adani No means No. ‘Adani can’t keep bullying us, or pretending they have our consent. Consent is written in our hearts and minds, and the truth is we have said no. Time and again.. ‘And we shouldn’t have to keep saying it.
Adani haven’t been able to put money on the table for this project or even say when they’ll start digging. They’ve given nothing to our people, or to the people of Queensland and Australia, except a bunch of false promises. The smart money and honest commentators know Adani’s Carmichael mine is going nowhere.
‘But still our rights are at extreme risk. The Queensland Government could yield to this corrupt polluting corporation and “legally” rip up our Native Title, just so they can say they have their final “approval”.
‘We continue to hold the line and have many tens of thousands of supporters in Australia
and around the world, but we need more. We need to build a more powerful movement,
standing in solidarity with us, to take on Adani’s wealth, political influence and dirty tricks.
‘Sign our petition to support our fight against Adani.
‘We are in the fight of our lives. Adani have shown a relentless determination to use unjust legal maneouvres to trample our rights. But this fight is bigger than Adani. It’s about the rights that all Aboriginal people have to say no to dirty extractive industries that profit from our traditional homelands. It’s about our right under international law to be free from discrimination, and to choose our own economic future.
‘We have a vision for our people that’s sustainable. We want economic independence, and to make a future on our country that is respectful of the land and uplifting for our people.
We want to invest in solar energy and other new clean enterprises. We don’t want scraps from a corrupt corporation looking to profit from the permanent destruction of our culture, or meagre handouts and low paid dirty jobs that require us to give up our human rights.
‘When we say No to Adani, we mean No. We hope you’ll stand with us.
‘Support our fight: wanganjagalingou.com.au/our-fight/
‘Adrian Burragubba, cultural leader and senior spokesperson with Murrawah Johnson, Youth spokesperson and Linda Bobongie, W&J Council Chairperson
for the Wangan and Jagalingou Traditional Owners Council’ northcoastvoices.blogspot.com.au/2018/05/wangan-and-jagalingou-traditional.html
USA rejected Julian Assange’s offer to talk about Wikileaks and ‘Russiagate’
US has no interest in hearing what Julian Assange can freely say about Russiagate – Max Blumenthal https://www.rt.com/news/428010-assange-russiagate-testimony-blumenthal/
Assange, who is currently incommunicado in the Ecuadorean embassy in London, reportedly offered – through an intermediary – to talk to US investigators about the release of DNC documents by WikiLeaks during the 2016 US election campaign. Continue reading
Submission: NO RADIOACTIVE WASTE ON AGRICULTURAL LAND IN KIMBA OR SOUTH AUSTRALIA.
NO RADIOACTIVE WASTE ON AGRICULTURAL LAND IN KIMBA OR SA.SUBMISSION TO THE SENATE INQUIRY INTO THE SELECTION PROCESS FOR A NATIONAL RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT FACILITY IN SOUTH AUSTRALIA.“To campaign against any nuclear radioactive waste management facility in South Australia’s agricultural land and in particular the District Council of Kimba” Toni Scott Secretary No Radioactive Waste on Agricultural Land in Kimba or SA (Submission No. 46)
The No Radioactive Waste on Agricultural Land in Kimba or SA is a group of local residents, farmers and business owners opposed to building a Radioactive Waste Facility on prime farming land in Kimba. Our 240 financial members consist mainly of people from Kimba and the broader Eyre Peninsula.
We would like to thank the Senators that have given their time to investigate this process. Through our experiences with the process we conclude that the site selection process for the siting of a national radioactive waste dump is flawed, we have taken the time to outline some of our concerns and ask that you would consider our recommendations.
- The definition of Broad Community Support has been inconsistent throughout the process. We recommend that the Minister sets a % for broad community support.
- 2. We are strongly opposed to the siting of a Radioactive Waste Facility on Agricultural Land.
- 3. The process is divisive and lacks honesty, fairness and transparency.
Members of the No Radioactive Waste on Agricultural Land in Kimba or SA invite further consultation with your inquiry and would be happy to provide more information through a hearing.
ATTACHMENTS:
1.National Radioactive Waste Management Facility (NRWMF)
Phase 1 Summary Report April 2016
- National Radioactive Waste Management Facility Project Summary of engagement in the Kimba community December 2016 www.radioactivewaste.gov.au
- Declaration of Results. Distric Council of Kimba. National Radioctive Waste Management Project Ballot
- National Radioactive Waste Management Facility Phase 1 Summary Report. Kimba 2017
- Attachment A. Objectives and Criteria
- Code of Practice for the near surface disposal of radioactive waste in Australia (1992). Radiation health series No 35
- Low – Intermediate Level Radioactive Waste Facility Process Timeline NRWMF in Kimba
These attachments can be downloaded with this Submission No. 46 at https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Economics/Wastemanagementfacility/Submissions
Federal Government National Nuclear Waste Dump Selection Process – a B-grade horror movie plot.
Image courtesy Kim Mavromatis
Kim Mavromatis No Nuclear Waste Dump Anywhere in South Australia, 28 May 18 The Federal Government National Nuclear Waste Dump Selection Process for South Australia is like a B-grade horror movie plot.
Australian Federal Liberal Government’s Land Selection Criteria for a National Radioactive Nuclear Waste Dump proposed for South Australia :
· Nothing scientific about the land selection process – anyone can nominate their land, including Pro-Nuclear Ex-Federal Liberal politicians – and get paid 4 times what it’s worth.
· Doesn’t matter where the land is located.
· Don’t worry about your neighbours – their land will appreciate in value with a toxic radioactive Nuclear Waste Dump next-door.
· The majority of Aboriginal people, who say NO to a Nuclear Waste Dump, will be given the same amount of respect they received during British Nuclear testing at Maralinga and Emu Fields.
· Doesn’t matter if the region is a national icon and major tourism attraction.
· Don’t worry about seismic activity or if the area is prone to flooding.
· Doesn’t matter if the land nominated is in an important grain-growing region.
· Doesn’t matter that building a Nuclear Waste Dump facility in South Australia is against the law.
· You can trust politicians to keep their word – once in place the Nuclear Waste Dump won’t get changed from an Intermediate to High-Level Nuclear Waste Dump.
· Special Note : the new South Australian Premier Steven Marshall and the state Liberals said No to a Nuclear Waste Dump before the election.
· Most of the state won’t have a say in the Clayton’s consultation process – community support will only be solicited within a 50km radius of the Nuclear Waste Dump – and 2 million carrots will help bribe the locals.
· Don’t worry about Nuclear Waste accidents – there won’t be any and they won’t be catastrophic. It’s not irresponsible to ship nuclear waste half way across the country through populated Australian cities and towns, on busy public roads and highways, on ships and trains – no safety concerns – livelihoods won’t be lost – property values dive – who pays the insurance? – nothing to see here, move along.
· The Nuclear Waste Dump will be in operation for 100 years and monitored for 200-300 years, but don’t worry that Intermediate-Level Nuclear Waste can remain highly radioactive for 100,000 years and can be as hazardous as High-Level Nuclear Waste.
· Don’t worry that the temporary canisters holding the Nuclear Waste above ground are temporary because nothing is permanent.
· In 60 years, the nuclear industry hasn’t found a solution for Nuclear Waste, but she’ll be right mate, they’ll find a solution in the next 60 years.
· The Nuclear Waste Dumps proposed for South Australia are located near Kimba (Eyre Peninsula grain-growing region), 75kms from the Spencer Gulf coastline – and in the Flinders Ranges near Hawker (national icon and major tourism attraction), 29kms from Lake Torrens and 84kms north of Port Augusta.
Q&A
Q: Once in place how easy is it for politicians to change an Intermediate-Level Nuclear Waste Dump into a High-Level Nuclear Waste Dump?
A: Very easy.
Q: How long does it take High-Level Nuclear Waste to become harmless?
A: It never becomes harmless.
Q: Compare High-level Nuclear Waste (spent nuclear fuel) Radioactivity to Uranium ore?
A: After 30 years, High-Level Nuclear Waste is 10,000x more radioactive than uranium ore – after 140 yrs, 1,000x more radioactive – after 2,000 yrs, 100x more radioactive – after 43,000 yrs, 10x more radioactive – after 10 million yrs, same radioactivity as uranium ore (NWMO Nuclear Waste Management Org, Canada). https://www.facebook.com/groups/1314655315214929/
Yet another failure for Australian uranium company Paladin – Namibia uranium mine mothballed
Paladin mothballs Namibia uranium mine Crreamer Media’s Mining Weeekly 25TH MAY 2018
BY: ESMARIE SWANEPOEL CREAMER MEDIA SENIOR DEPUTY EDITOR: AUSTRALASIA ERTH (miningweekly.com) – Dual-listed Paladin Energy on Friday confirmed that its Langer Heinrich uranium mine, in Namibia, was being placed under care and maintenance, but said that the low-cost openpit operation would be one of the first to resume production when the uranium market normalised.
Paladin in April said that it was unlikely to resume physical mining activities at the mine despite the medium-grade ore stockpile currently feeding the processing plant set to be exhausted before mid-2019.
The ASX and TSX-listed company on Friday said that it had received consent from all the relevant stakeholders to place the operation under care and maintenance, and had now stopped presenting ore to the plant.
There would be a run-down phase of up to three months where various stages of the plant would be progressively suspended and cleaned, and during this time, there would be some continued production of finished uranium.
Paladin noted that once the run-down phase was complete, operations would have been completely suspended and Langer Heinrich would be under care and maintenance. ……http://www.miningweekly.com/article/paladin-mothballs-namibia-uranium-mine-2018-05-25
Adani coal mining company to pay for Isaac council staff working on Carmichael mine activities
Adani to pay for Isaac council staff working on Carmichael mine activities, ABC News 28 May 18 
, By Josh Robertson and Emilia Terzon
A year on, the key goal of Uluru statement remains elusive
‘The statement is a proposal of constitutional reform that would establish
a constitutionally enshrined First Nations representative body to advise parliament
on policy affecting Indigenous peoples and
commit Australia to a process of truth-telling of its colonial history
through the establishment of a Makarrata commission.’
Calla Wahlquist
@callapilla 26 May 2018
‘While politicians have been demeaning it,
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people have been having their own discussions.
‘The Uluru statement canvas, escorted by Uluru delegate and
Torres Strait man of Badhulgau and Kulkalaig heritage Thomas Mayor,
has traversed the northern half of the country and made its way down the east coast to Melbourne,
stopping in at community meetings, festivals, morning teas and business gatherings. …
‘It’s a slow, grassroots process, funded thanks to Mayor’s role as the
NT branch secretary of the Maritime Union of Australia
– although strictly it’s outside the union’s remit
– but the reception has been overwhelmingly positive.
‘“I still have hope because I’ve been travelling around with the Uluru statement
and everywhere I go there’s more and more support,” he said.
‘“I see momentum building.
And when you explain to people how many similar moments of hope
there have been throughout our history and how we have continued to struggle,
and how this particular time we’re not going to take no for an answer,
and how this statement is just going to keep travelling until we get what we seek,
I think that we can get enough pressure there so that
those aspirations can be achieved.”
‘Other working groups have been convened across the country.
On Saturday the statement and Mayor will be in Turnbull’s Sydney harbourside electorate of Wentworth,
one of the wealthiest in Australia, for a door-knocking campaign aiming to convince people to
lobby their local member to change his mind.
‘They will also aim to counter misinformation about the proposal,
which Mayor said is easily done once people hear the true intent
behind the proposed reforms. … ‘
Read more of Calla’s extensive, thought-provoking & interesting article:
www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/may/26/a-year-on-the-key-goal-of-uluru-statement-remains-elusive
1 This month
Chernobyl: The Lost Tapes – A good documentary on Chernobyl on SBS available On Demand for the next 3 weeks– https://www.sbs.com.au/ondemand/tv-program/chernobyl-the-lost-tapes/235274195556
20 May – Webinar – The dangerous world of AUKUS, US, military occupation and suppression of dissent
National Webinar, 20th May, 2026, 6.30pm AEST. Confronting laws restricting/suppressing protest speech and action
Speakers: Former Sen. Rex Patrick, Lawyer Nick Hanna ,Arthur Rorris ,Jorgen Doyle, Sen David Shoebbridge,
Facilitator Kelley Tranter.
of the week – Australians for War Powers Reform (AWPR)
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity
Antinuclear 