Ms McKenzie said: “Australian Aboriginal people live in a land that they are the first people, yet our culture belief, our religion is ignored, our heritage and burial sites desecrated, we have never been acknowledged in the constituion. This act of placing a nuclear waste dump on the Adnyamathana nations country is cultral genocide.
“The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Article 29.2 says that governments must get consent from traditional owners to place any toxic substances on country, which never happened “Please dont impact Aboriginal people like Britons did with Maralinga, when they tested the atomic bomb. Don’t destroy culture.
Video: Aborigine anger over lack of action to stop Scots nuclear waste transfers Martin Williams ,January 2018 http://www.heraldscotland.com/…/15808815.Video__Aborigine_…/
CAMPAIGNERS have accused the Scottish Government of a lack of decisive action following protests over plans to dump nuclear waste from Dounreay at a sacred Aboriginal burial place.
Ministers have come under fire for failing to review proposals for a sacred area of Wallerberdina, 280 miles north of Adelaide, to become a potential location for Australia’s first nuclear dump.
It came despite Aborigine tribes people providing a video appeal to the officials to stop the dumping.
Campaigner Gary Cushway, a dual Australian-British citizen living in Glasgow, pressed the point in a meeting with the Government which was arranged after he wrote to First Minister Nicola Sturgeon over the controversy.
Wallerberdina is said to include Aboriginal burial mounds, fossilised bones and stone tools.
But it has been earmarked as part of a deal that returns spent fuel processed at the nuclear facility currently being decommissioned at the nuclear site in Caithness to its country of origin.
Mr Cushway said he was “disappointed” by the “lack of decisive action” after asking that the Government review the agreement.
Aborigines provided a video appeal to the Scottish Government to stop the dumping in an area identified as a potential location for Australia’s first nuclear waste dump as part of a deal that returns spent fuel processed at the nuclear facility currently being decommissioned in Dounreay, Caithness, to its country of origin.
The video, which came in the form of a documentary, highlighted one Aborigine speaking in the Adnyamanthatha language saying, “the poison, leave it alone” and “we don’t want it”.
The proposed dump site is next to an indigenous protected area where Aborigines are still allowed to hunt, and is part of the traditional home of the Adnyamathanha people, one of several hundred indigenous groups in Australia.
The Dounreay Waste Substitution Policy, agreed in 2012, sees waste from Australia, Belgium, Germany and Italy processed at the Scottish facility to make it safe for storage after being returned to its country of origin. Continue reading →
While the South Australian Liberal Party’s official position was opposition to the Labor government’s 2016 plan to import nuclear wastes, Liberal politicians as well as Labor were funded by the Taiwanese government for trips to Taiwan to promote the cause of importing nuclear wastes.
During the financial year 2014-2015, Tom Kenyon and his wife received travel, accommodation and food courtesy of the Government of Taiwan. The Members Register of Interests for that year contains the information in the clipping below.
UPDATE – Other Parliamentarians to visit Taiwan and discuss nuclear industry include:
– Tom Kenyon (Newland) in 2006 (funding: GoT)
– Liz Penfold (Flinders) in 2007 (funding: unknown)
– Trish White (Taylor) in 2006-2007 (funding: GoT)*
– Michael Atkinson in March 2011 (funding: GoT)*
– Stephen Griffiths in March 2011 (funding: GoT)*
– Tom Kenyon (Newland) in 2014-2015 (funding: GoT)
– MLC Tung Ngo in 2016 (funding: unknown)
* Those marked with ‘*’ have not had the purpose of their travel confirmed.
Tom Kenyon’s visit to Taiwan in 2006, during which he claims he embraced the idea for South Australia to import spent nuclear fuel for storage and disposal, was paid for by the Government of Taiwan.
The supporting evidence was found in the 2007 Members Register of Interests, held by the SA Parliament.
Thanks to Sandra Kanck for suggesting that the Register might contain such details, and to the administrators at the SA Parliament for making past Members Registers of Interests available at my request.
Dan Monceaux , 6 Jan 18 Trish White also travelled to Taiwan in 2006-2007 at the expense of the Government of Taiwan. It was documented in an Erratum to the Members Register of Interests for that year.
More recently, White was a signatory on the latest Open Letter hosted by Bright New World, calling for the door to be kept open on the consideration of spent nuclear fuel importation to SA.
Her Wikipedia biography states that she was an engineer and project manager before entering the SA parliament. She also worked with DSTO. After leaving the Parliament, she became a senior exec. with engineering consultants, WorleyParsons.
I wonder if she traveled with Tom Kenyon on this occasion?
Taiwanese energy firm rejects Martin Hamilton-Smith’s claim it would help set up SA nuclear waste dump,Daniel Wills, State political editor, The Advertiser, 15 Dec 2016 TAIWAN’S state-owned energy company has bluntly rejected Investment and Trade Minister Martin Hamilton-Smith’s claim the country would consider paying to help set up a nuclear waste dump in SA, saying in a letter that it “hereby declares this is a false information”.
Just days after Premier Jay Weatherill’s citizens’ jury last month overwhelmingly dumped on plans for nuclear storage in SA, amid concerns about trust, Mr Hamilton-Smith insisted he had met with Taiwanese officials who expressed a “clear message” of interest in investment.
“There’s clearly a demand and our neighbours may be in a position to put hundreds of millions, if not billions, into infrastructure and then paying to dump waste on an ongoing basis,” he said.
However, correspondence from state-owned power company Taipower and the country’s Atomic Energy Council to government party MP Su Chih-Feng rejects Mr Hamilton-Smith’s claim.
While they note there was a meeting with Mr Hamilton-Smith on November 10, Taipower says his spin of the events in Adelaide three days later was “a false information”.
The translation from Mandarin to English was done by a Taiwanese NGO and provided to The Advertiser by antinuclear activists Friends of the Earth Australia. It states Taipower was interested in using a dump which had been established, but not paying to help set one up.
“A foreign solution is one of the options for Taipower. However, foreign solution is also sensitive case in terms of international relationships,” the letter states.
“Therefore, foreign solutions should carefully consider both domestic and foreign regulations.
“Foreign solutions is a sensitive case with a lot of uncertainties.
“Taipower will consider to be a ‘customer’ after the country has developed a disposal facility.”
Taiwan’s Atomic Energy Council also said Mr Hamilton-Smith’s claim was “a false information”…… http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/…/87d59e1b045388a83ead14d..
Paul Waldon, Fight To Stop Nuclear Waste Dump In Flinders Ranges SA https://www.facebook.com/groups/344452605899556/6 Jan 18 Dr Carl Magnus Larsson is the CEO of ARPANSA, and the man that signs off on a nuclear waste dump, but has he a vested interest in the proposal to abandon such waste?
Is ARPANSA wrongfully regulating and promoting the project? Why did ARPANSA fail to address the safety issues at Lucas Heights that Comcare bought to their attention?
Why does ARPANSA have trouble dealing with people in group discussions?
Is ARPANSA being strong-armed by DIIS, and ANSTO to push a radioactive dump on a community of unwilling people?
Is ARPANSA listening to the majority that are saying “NO”?
Is ARPANSA insensitive to native heritage.? Is ARPANSA ignoring the science of nuclear waste being abandonment in a environment that fails on all the criteria put forward by DIIS?
Is ARPANSA honest and forthcoming with all the issues pertaining to the toxic proposal?
EPA approves $900m rare earths mine in Central Australia despite radioactive risk, ABC News, By Ben Millington, 5 Jan 18,A proposed $900 million rare earths mine in Central Australia has been recommended for approval by the Northern Territory Environment Protection Authority (EPA), after an assessment process lasting more than two years.,
Arafura Resources’ Nolans Project at Aileron, 135 kilometres north-west of Alice Springs, would mine rare earth materials such as neodymium and praseodymium, used to manufacture strong magnets for wind turbines and electric vehicles.
The EPA identified several long-term environmental risks and impacts with the project, but found they could be managed.
“There will have to be a high level of operational management control for this project over a couple of generations, and there’ll have to be a high level of regulatory scrutiny, there’s no two ways about that,” EPA chairman Paul Vogel said.
Whyalla and Port Augusta could be a renewables powerhouse, says local mayor,ABC North and West By Tom Rohde , 4 Jan 18
SA’s clean-energy projects
A hybrid power station is being built at Coober Pedy. The hope is that the outback community can be powered solely by solar, wind and diesel energy
Investors have funded a $300m solar battery-power plant at Roxby Downs
A wind, solar and battery farm is planned at Crystal Brook in the state’s mid north
A 100 megawatt solar powered facility is being built at Tailem Bend
US-based company Solar Reserve is seeking federal support for a $650 million solar-thermal project in Port Augusta
Zen Energy wants to build a solar power plant in the Upper Spencer Gulf
The mayor of a South Australian regional port city built on the steel industry and iron ore mining says it could pair with a neighbouring centre to become the nation’s hub for renewable energy.
Whyalla Mayor Lyn Breuer said she hoped her city could team up with Port Augusta 80 kilometres away to make the plan a reality.
Regional South Australian cities have seen several energy projects announced over the past year, with construction on a new solar thermal power station in Port Augusta to start early this year.
In October last year, Whyalla steelworks owner Sanjeev Gupta announced that he had approved a plan worth up to $700 million for solar, battery storage and pumped hydro, with 200 megawatts of solar photovoltaics at Whyalla……..
Port Augusta’s mayor Sam Johnson said he believed the region was already becoming a hub for renewable energy.
“Port Augusta will, and I believe actually is becoming the renewable capital of Australia and there’s no doubt that Whyalla is a direct link into that.
‘Aboriginal people across this country are calling for a Treaty with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people
that recognises Aboriginal sovereignty as the First Peoples was never ceded,
address the stark disparity in economic social conditions of Aboriginal communities poverty
and the structural racism that continues to repress Aboriginal people.
‘The Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples,
now endorsed by the Australian Government, asserts in Article 3:
Indigenous peoples’ rights to self-determination.
‘Yet Australia remains the only commonwealth colonised country
without a Treaty with its Indigenous peoples.
‘Calls for a Treaty were repeatedly raised by Aboriginal communities
during the recent Constitutional Recognition consultations
as a practical means to recognize Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders
as the First Nation Peoples and to implement the structural changes
required to establish self-determination.
‘A Treaty builds on the Statement from the Heart’s call for a ‘Makarrata’,
a Yolgnu word for coming together after a conflict, to move forward together.
It also builds on several State based Treaties currently being developed.
‘A Treaty sets a process to legitimately move forward in partnership
between Aboriginal people and the Australian State.’
Adani $1b loan bid was likely to fail key criteria for NAIF approval, ABC News, By Josh Robertson, 5 Jan 18, Adani’s bid for a $1 billion taxpayer-funded loan may have been doomed even before it was scuppered by Queensland’s Palaszczuk Government, the Productivity Commission has said.
Key points:
Qld Govt vetoed critical $1 billion loan for Adani mine
Productivity Commission says mine may have failed loan criteria anyway
Qld Govt could also veto rail company loan bid
The miner’s proposed Galilee Basin rail line faced rejection by the Northern Australian Infrastructure Facility (NAIF) because it may have failed key hurdles, the commission’s latest bulletin suggested.
However, the commission is yet to analyse a rival NAIF loan bid by rail operator Aurizon, which the State Government will also consider blocking in line with an election promise relating to Adani.
It comes as environmental activists plan to target Aurizon over its rail proposal, which would set up an export route for Adani.
State Labor told lobby group GetUp! during the election campaign in November it would veto “any NAIF loan” that enabled Adani’s coal project.
The Productivity Commission’s December newsletter noted that projects seeking low-interest loans from NAIF must “not otherwise be able attract finance, but would be commercially viable once constructed”.
There must also be “a public benefit from the infrastructure [to justify the cost to the taxpayer of the short-term assistance provided]”.
“Many of the projects suggested in the media as candidates for NAIF funding — such as the rail line to the Galilee Basin and various large irrigation dams — may fail at least one of these criteria,” it said.
This raised the risk of taxpayers throwing good money after bad, the commission suggested.
“If the return on the investment does not cover the operational costs of the infrastructure and the costs of servicing the loan at market rates over the life of the asset, the small initial level of assistance provided by a concessional loan may simply become another case of inefficient resource allocation,” it said……http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-01-05/adani-loan-bid-likely-to-fail-before-palaszczuk-intervention/9305040
Pacific rift: When nuclear tests made France a dirty word, SMH, Damien Murphy, 1 Jan 18 “…….the 1985 sinking of the Greenpeace vessel Rainbow Warrior by French operatives, union outrage, peacenik panic and maintenance of uranium exports shaped Australia’s response to Paris’ decision to start letting off bombs as far away as possible from La Belle France.
In a June 5 report to cabinet about possible resumption of French tests, the minister for foreign affairs, Gareth Evans and the minister for Pacific Island affairs, Gordon Bilney, said memories of the Rainbow Warrior were strong and New Zealand could be expected to postpone official visits and suspend military-related co-operation with France.
The ministers were concerned about Australia looking as hard-nosed as New Zealand.
“New Zealand will obviously be hoping that Australia’s response is similar to theirs,” the ministers said. “Wellington’s response may have an impact in Australia if it is significantly stronger than ours.”
The ministers advised treading softly so as not to make nuclear testing dominant in the bilateral relationship and stop the French from taking retaliation.
“Three specific areas of current Australian interest could be targeted by the French: Australia’s (United Nation’s) Security Council bid, market access for special Australian products such as kangaroo meat, and Australia’s candidature for the position of secretary-general of the South Pacific Commission.”
On June 13, president Jacques Chirac announced the resumption of nuclear tests in the South Pacific.
The Keating government hardened up its act.
On June 22 cabinet decided to recall Australia’s ambassador and Australian Defence Force staff from Paris, suspend Australian ship and aircraft visits to French territories and ban French ship visits and “not progress” collaboration on military logistics and equipment or exchange classified information.
Cabinet maintained the policy of not negotiating any new uranium contracts with France while it was conducting nuclear tests in the South Pacific.
“These measures are in line with the government’s consistent policy on this issue, which has been to respond in a measured, graduated way, leaving open every avenue for France to respond to South Pacific concerns,” an attachment to a cabinet minute noted.
Microgrids are in their early stages in Australia, but the country is swiftly taking a world-leading position, making the nation a renewable innovation hub.
Australian towns going off the grid http://www.theage.com.au/business/the-economy/australian-towns-going-off-the-grid-20171219-p4yxvv.html, Cole Latimer, 3 Jan 17, Australia is facing an energy crisis. As prices rose to new highs last year and the ever-constant threat of blackouts hung over the east coast, many Australians looked for energy alternatives. Some turned to solar panels and battery storage technology to solve their bill woes, gain greater control of their own power and make a real change in terms of their impact on the climate.
While they are taking steps at the individual level, others are looking to take full advantage of the push for more renewable energy and shift away from centralised power systems on a larger scale.
This is seeing the rise of microgrids, a unique solution to a very Australian problem.
The vast distance covered by Australian energy distribution networks presents a serious problem: How do you get energy generated from point A to a user at point B, and how much will it cost?
Microgrids circumvent this issue by creating power and keeping it local, and at the same time lowering costs by cutting much of the associated distribution costs. Microgrids are autonomous energy distribution systems that can generate power from its users and operate off the main grid, or connect to existing grids, and support different generation assets and load demand.
This market is forecast to increase to more than $20 billion annually, with around half of all Australian homes expected to have rooftop solar panels installed, by 2024. Continue reading →
Spent nuclear fuel storage at Sydney’s Lucas Heights was destined to be full within three years, cabinet was told in a December 1995 minute.
The cabinet agreed the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation should cost proposals to have Britain reprocess their spent fuel in Scotland, return all American spent fuel to the United States and not accumulate spent fuel beyond the capacity of existing storage.
Cabinet wanted the information for consideration in the 1996-97 budget.
The minister for primary industries and energy, Bob Collins, and the minister for industry, technology and commerce, Peter Cook, told cabinet that reducing spent research reactor fuel holdings would be welcomed by the community at Lucas Heights although any operations involving radioactive materials were likely to be opposed by groups that object to nuclear activities.
Australian Defence Force on heightened alert during Russian military exercise in Indonesia ABC News Defence reporter Andrew Greene, 30 Dec 17, Defence personnel in Darwin were operating at “increased readiness” earlier this month as Russian strategic bombers conducted navigation exercises close to Australia, flying out of an Indonesian military base.
Key points:
RAAF Base Darwin placed on a “short period” of heightened alert
Russian Ministry of Defence claims it “carried out air alert mission over neutral waters of south Pacific Ocean”
Defence Department would have been concerned about Russian intelligence collection, defence expert says
The ABC can reveal RAAF Base Darwin was placed on a “short period” of heightened alert, while over 100 Russian personnel and several aircraft were stationed at the Biak Airbase in Indonesia’s eastern Papua province.
During the five-day stopover two nuclear-capable Tu-95 bombers flew their first ever patrol mission over the South Pacific, prompting concerns they may have been collecting valuable intelligence.
French nuclear test tensions threatened Olympic Dam expansion plans, declassified Cabinet documents reveal, Peter Jean, The Advertiser, January 1, 2018
THE FRENCH NUCLEAR TESTING
KANGAROO meat and other exports to Europe could be jeopardised if Australia took a hard line against French nuclear testing in the South Pacific, the Keating cabinet feared in 1995.
A ban on uranium exports to France could also have put at risk a potential $1 billion expansion of South Australia’s Olympic Dam.
The resumption of underground nuclear testing in French Polynesia sparked boycotts of French businesses in Australia and plunged the Labor government into a diplomatic and political crisis.
Mr Keating recalled Australia’s Ambassador from Paris and suspended some defence co-operation with France, including ship visits and training arrangements.
In a May cabinet submission ahead of the nuclear tests, Foreign Affairs Minister Gareth Evans and Pacific Island Affairs Minister Gordon Bilney warned that Australia’s interests could be damaged if the Government overreacted.
“Australia’s response should also be shaped so as to limit French retaliation in those sectors of the relationship we wish to see preserved,’’ the submission said.
“Three specific areas of current Au1stralian interest could be targeted by the French: Australia’s Security Council bid, market access for special Australian products such as kangaroo meat, and Australia’s candidature for the position of Secretary-General of the (South Pacific Commission).’’
There were widespread calls for Australia to suspend uranium exports to France but this would have led to the Government having to pay compensation to mining companies with existing contracts.
Australia had already imposed a ban on new uranium export contracts with French companies until France agreed to a comprehensive nuclear test ban treaty.
The papers note the Australian government was under increasing pressure from Europe and Pacific island nations to take tougher steps to reduce carbon dioxide emissions.
The truth was that the “no regrets” policy made Australia’s efforts to cut emissions ineffectual, as officials acknowledged in the cabinet papers.
Among the policy responses considered was a carbon or energy tax
Cabinet debated how to cling on to government’s ‘no regrets’ policy while maintaining Australia’s influence at international bargaining table, Guardian, Anne Davies, Australia’s response to climate change and the challenge of meeting its international obligations proved as difficult for the Keating government in 1994 and 1995 as it would for future governments.
Cabinet papers released by the Australian National Archives on Monday show that much of the debate in the Keating cabinet was about how to cling on to the government’s “no regrets” policy while maintaining Australia’s influence at the international bargaining table.
The “no regrets” policy meant Australia would consider only measures that involved cutting emissions without any adverse impact on the economy or trade competitiveness. That ruled out most measures to tax fossil fuels, which would increase the cost of electricity.
It meant Australia relied mainly on creating carbon sinks by limiting land-clearing and planting trees.
Australia had signed on to targets at an international conference in Toronto in 1990 on the basis that the convention would recognise Australia’s high dependence on fossil fuels.
But by September 1994 ministers were told Australia was falling woefully behind the implied target set in the Framework Convention on Climate Change and the interim planning target it had set itself.
A note to reflect on 2017 which has seen the Australian nuclear free community restrict uranium exports, derail plans for a global high level radioactive waste dump and help advance an international initiative to abolish nuclear weapons and receive the Nobel Peace Prize.
Not too shabby!
The end of the calendar year provides a pause to welcome the entrance of new life and to mark and mourn the passing of old.
It is also a time to reflect on our collective efforts and achievements – the below observations are by no means comprehensive but my sense of gratitude, solidarity and respect is.
With all best wish for a refreshing and recharging break.
I look forward to seeing and working with you in season 18,
Uranium:
A big year of activity that has seen the industry further contested and constrained.
In March the WA state election saw the defeat of the aggressively pro-nuclear Barnett government. WA Labor were elected with a strong no uranium policy but have disappointingly failed to clearly implement this and are allowing four projects to continue to be advanced. All projects remain the focus of community concern and active opposition. The WA Conservation Council and Traditional Owners have taken Supreme Court action to oppose the approval of Cameco’s Yeelirrie project with a decision expected in the first quarter of 2018 and pressure is growing on Vimy Resources, the most enthusiastic uranium hopeful. There are no commercial uranium operations in the West and any wannabe miners face a very tough road.
In November Queensland Labor were returned to government with a strong anti-uranium position and the door remains tightly shut on the uranium sector in the sunshine state.
In the NT further assessment is under way about rehabilitation and clean up options for the contaminated Rum Jungle site and issues around the closure and rehabilitation of the heavily impacted Ranger mine site on Mirarr land in Kakadu moved to centre stage. The era of uranium mining in Kakadu is over: Jabiluka is stopped and stalled, Koongarra is finally and formally part of Kakadu National Park and Ranger has stopped mining and is in the final days of mineral processing. The challenge now is a massive one – to help ensure that the NT and federal governments and Rio Tinto have the commitment, competence and capacity to clean up, exit and transition in the most credible and effective way.
South Australia remains the nations sole uranium mining state but even the pro-nuclear Royal Commission found that there was no justification for increased mining. The global uranium market remains over-supplied and the commodity price remains deeply depressed. Our planets energy future is renewable, not radioactive and Australia is ripping and shipping less uranium oxide each year. In contrast to the continuing column inches and Mineral Council of Australia drumbeats – the market and the community both continue to have little confidence in, or time for, the uranium sector.
International radioactive waste:
One of the best news stories of 2018 was the declaration in June that the plan to ship, store and ultimately bury one-third of the world’s high level radioactive waste into South Australia was dead’.
This result is a massive tribute to the sustained efforts, action and advocacy of so many – especially SA Aboriginal communities and representatives who spearheaded the community resistance. The result is also a real validation of the potency of people power over poisoned power. There was deep and well-resourced political, corporate, media and institutional support for the dump plan and this was stopped by the little people stepping up and doing big things. This result has significant international implications as the absence of an Australian based ‘disposal pathway’ makes it harder for aging reactors overseas to gain license extensions.
This is the second time in as many decades that the Australian community has successfully opposed plans to open a global high level radioactive waste dump with Pangea Resources seeking to advance a plan in WA in the late 1990’s. Some of the same players then were also behind the recent SA push and, like liberty, the price of keeping Australia free from being a global dumping ground is eternal vigilance.
National radioactive waste:
The federal government continues to lurch along an increasingly dry gully in its search to find a site to develop a national radioactive waste dump and store. Three sites in South Australia – one in the Flinders Ranges and two near Kimba on the Eyre Peninsula – remain the focus. All sites are strongly contested by large numbers of locals and in the Flinders Adnyamathanha Traditional Owners are continuing to lead the campaign. There has been lots of activity with publications, films, songs, exhibitions, rallies, actions, speaking tours, gatherings, public meetings, media events, Canberra trips and much more.
The government faces a set of sustained and significant procedural and community roadblocks in advancing this plan. It has had its eyes off the ball and been playing musical chairs over Ministerial responsibility – the song has now stopped with Matt Canavan in the hot seat. A growing range of groups are advocating a revised approach to responsible waste management based on extended interim storage at the two federal sites where 95% of the waste is currently stored and a detailed examination of the full range of future management options, not simply a search for a remote postcode. Hardly rocket science and set to be an area of key movement focus in 2018.
Nuclear weapons abolition:
Viva ICAN!
Against a backdrop of increasing global nuclear tensions an Australian born initiative has provided hope and a pathway to peace. The International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons was formed in Melbourne a decade ago and ICAN was behind the UN’s adoption of a treaty to prohibit nuclear weapons earlier this year. The treaty seeks to make nuclear weapons illegal and to challenge and change the ways these weapons are viewed and valued. It is our shared planets best chance to get rid of our worst weapons. In October ICAN was awarded the 2017 Nobel Peace Prize in recognition of its efforts. Surreal, timely and important. In 2018 work will continue to grow the treaty, including pressuring Australia to sign and ratify.
Along with ICAN’s Nobel there was other external recognition and acknowledgement of the efforts of Australian nuclear free work in 2017 including WA’s Judy Blyth’s commendation in ACF’s Rawlinson Award, respected and beloved Yankunytjatajara elder and prominent anti-nuclear and land rights campaigner Yami Lester was posthumously awarded a SA Environment Award lifetime achievement and the makers of the remarkable Collisions virtual reality film telling a key part of the Martu story won an Emmy Award. And more….congratulations to all.
Of course most of our work is not seeking and does not receive awards. It is done to move Australia away from fuelling and facilitating a trade that disrespects and endangers community and country today and far into the future. It is profound and pivotal – and it is making a real and demonstrable difference and I am proud to work and travel alongside you in this continuing journey.
The Numbers Don’t Stack Up: W&J’s Rights on the Chopping Block for Adani’s ‘Non Viable’ Project, New Matilda By John Quigginon In the fourth in a five part series on the proposed Adani Carmichael coal mine, John Quiggin looks at the numbers for the project, and like virtually all other parts of the planned project, they don’t survive closer examination. John Quiggin explains.
In what was lauded as a landmark moment for the Adani Group, in June 2017, its chairman Gautam Adani announced his board had given final investment approval for the $5.3 billion first stage of its Carmichael mine project in the Galilee Basin, as well as approval for the associated rail line project, to be constructed from the Basin to the Abbot Point coal terminal.
At the same time, however, Adani asserted its project’s future would remain contingent on finance. Given the projects’ outstanding financial issues, exposed in detail here, alongside Adani’s sustained failure to reach agreement with Traditional Owners, which undercuts the legal basis and legitimacy for this mine to proceed on W&J Country, its future remains uncertain.
Seven years since Adani Mining Pty Ltd. – Adani’s Australian arm – moved into Australia when it secured coal tenements, it has neither financial nor legal close for its proposed Carmichael mine.
These are the shaky grounds on which W&J are expected to forego their rights, assume the destruction of their country, and be grateful for a tiny sliver of the pie.
Yet the rhetoric of 10,000 jobs and great social advancement that would flow from the supposed benefits of the project to Traditional Owners along its corridor, and especially the W&J on whose country the mega mine will operate, is a far cry from that which Adani has actually put on the table.
A preliminary analysis commissioned by the W&J Traditional Owners and presented to the claim group meeting on 2 December shows what a miserable proposition Adani’s proposed deal is for Traditional Owners.
Adani is offering Traditional Owners just 0.2 percent of its total revenue; far below industry benchmarks that indigenous groups should get 0.35 – 0.75 percent.
To put this in perspective, even if Adani doubled what was on offer, it would still only be equivalent to some of the lowest Indigenous Land Use Agreement (ILUA) deals in Australia.
The deal on offer is also out of balance in terms of the kinds of economic opportunities it will afford Indigenous communities; with primary focus on highly speculative job opportunities. Seventy-five per cent of Adani’s benefits package is wrapped up in jobs; and yet if the jobs don’t come, the purported benefits will simply not be realised.
While the economics of the mine represent a very poor deal for Traditional Owners, they are at the same time expected to cop the brunt of the costs – including destruction of country – for the mines go ahead………
Even with financial breaks from government, the evidence – drawing from the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA) and other recent figures – demonstrates the Adani mine-rail project is highly unlikely to be economically viable. On this basis, any public money lent to the project, whether through the NAIF, or through a deferral of royalties, is unlikely to be recovered……
Adani has proposed a package to support Traditional Owners – a kind of quasi compensation for destruction of Country – including a $250 million Indigenous Participation Plan for the Traditional Owner groups along it’s project corridor, and the wider Aboriginal community of Central Queensland.
The details of this, however, have been described by W&J as a parlous deal. Demonstrating this, W&J draw attention to the very limited job creation. And on the basis of figures provided by Adani, Traditional Owners employed by the mine would be paid just $35,000.00 per year, a figure that barely meets Australia’s minimum wage.
This plan on offer is no exchange for the losses of land and waters, cultural and self-determination that W&J would incur; which is why they remain resolute in their opposition to the proposed mine. They alone are expected to give up their ancient legacy and birth rights so that others can benefit.
W&J has every right to object to the mine and refuse consent………..
Antinuclear 