Mr Weatherill’s dramatic move on Monday to continue pursuing the nuclear industry despite the public condemnation of the union movement and opposition from a citizens’ jury he established has set off a round of headshaking within the party.
Mr Weatherill has proved his critics wrong at almost every step throughout his career. Many doubted a leader of the Left could ever take over a party run by the Right.
Almost as many wrote him off ahead of the last election, saying there was almost no way the Liberals could lose. But recent polls have shown a slide in his personal support, and Labor’s vote, in the past year.
Monday’s distant referendum pledge, publicly branded by SA Unions secretary Joe Szakacs as a “crazy or brave” move from a “tone deaf” leader, has led mutterings to become louder.
Should Mr Weatherill continue to dig his heels in, some are discussing contingency plans. While he looks safe as leader, there is a strong push to roll the nuclear policy.
One plan includes gathering the numbers to call on a special state convention to formally change the party’s platform so it includes a collective repudiation of the nuclear storage industry.
Left sources are confident the faction, including MPs and ministers, would bind against Mr Weatherill on the convention floor.
November 18, 2016
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
politics, South Australia |
Leave a comment
Poor ranking for Australia in climate action index released at Morocco talks http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2016/11/16/poor-ranking-australia-climate-action-index-released-morocco-talksAn international ranking of government actions on climate change has put Australia fifth last out of 58 countries. 16 NOV 2016
Australia’s climate change policies continue to be ranked as very poor in an international comparison of 58 countries.
The latest climate change performance index ranks Australia fifth last – the same rank as last year – in a list of nations responsible for 90 per cent of the world’s carbon emissions.
We’re ahead of Korea, Kazakhstan, Japan and Saudi Arabia but well behind France, Sweden and the UK which topped the index.
The report, released at United Nations climate change talks in Morocco, says Australia improved in the areas of renewable energy and cutting emissions but did worse in energy efficiency. Experts reviewing policies pointed to a wide gap between Australia’s national and state level plans for tackling climate change.
“While the former were rather unambitious and uninspired; the latter managed to some extent to take independent action,” the report states.
Australian Conservation Foundation says the report shows the world is watching as Australia’s carbon pollution rises.
“The government spruiks its climate credentials but Australia remains a laggard on cutting climate pollution,” chief executive Kelly O’Shanassy said.
While the government’s ratification of the Paris agreement was welcome, Ms O’Shanassy said Australia couldn’t meet its commitments under that deal unless it systematically closed coal-fired power plants and replaced them with renewable power.
November 18, 2016
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, climate change - global warming, politics international |
Leave a comment
Premier Jay Weatherill’s dazzling announcement of a referendum on the issue today comes without a date, question for the people to rule on or even support to pass enabling legislation.
There will not be a referendum vote at or before the next state election. A weird coalition of Liberals, the Greens and independent Nick Xenophon will see to that.
There is no clear path for rebuilding political consensus needed for the proposal to advance an inch or ever be accepted.
And even within his own party, Mr Weatherill has trouble. The union movement has peeled away and the idea of a referendum could even fail to win support if tested in Labor Caucus.
Mr Weatherill has staked a lot on the Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission. …….
While there will be no referendum, nuclear will definitely be on the ballot.
November 18, 2016
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
politics, South Australia |
Leave a comment
Let’s move on.
Perhaps the Premier will now see that this is a non-starter. He could save face, claiming the government was prepared to tackle hard issues in the interest of the State. Unfortunately he seems determined to press ahead. But please, whatever the political outcome, can we stop undermining the honest hard work of the jurors by claiming they were ‘biased’. The jury reached a democratic decision despite attempts to manufacture consent for a cautious ‘go ahead. Was this was solely evidence-based or influenced by lack of trust in the government’s capacity to manage the project and the way the facilitation team managed the jury process? My sense it was a bit of both; but based on evidence and the experience, not just emotion and opinion. Let’s now move on and consider how we might invest the money that would have been needed for this nuclear waste project in creating sustainable jobs in South Australia – manufacturing and installing the technologies needed for low carbon energy future.
One small voice from inside the recent SA Nuclear Citizen’s Jury http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=18669
By Tony Webb , 18 November 2016 Two thirds of the recent South Australian Citizen’s Jury  opposed the idea that South Australia could import, store and dispose of around a third of the world’s highly radioactive Nuclear wastes. Nuclear advocates have responded by suggesting bias in the jury. I’d like to share some of what happened inside the jury based on first hand experience rather than ill-informed opinions from outsiders.
Bias in the jury selection process?
First the claim the jury was ‘biased’. Simply untrue. I was one of 25,000 people randomly selected via Austria Post listings who received an invitation to participate and was one of around 1200 who expressed interest. I was not chosen for the first 50 person jury in June but was one of the 350 selected to participate in the second jury in October.
Was I biased? I freely admit to being an active critic of the nuclear industry for over 40 years. I’ve worked on public and worker-education over risks from radiation exposures in the UK USA Canada and here. Not always popular with anti-nuclear advocates, I’ve also argued that the world needs to find a long term solution to the problem of nuclear wastes. I’d prefer this be done by international agreement as a global-citizen responsibility. I’m sceptical it can be done responsibly as a commercial venture or as a solution to South Australia’s economic woes.
Were others in the jury similarly inclined or approaching it from a predetermined position? Definitely not. The evidence from jurors’ early postings on the ‘Basecamp’ discussion board, and questions in the jury sessions indicated that most if not all approached the task of reviewing the evidence with an open mind; facing up to the challenge of producing reasoned advice to government on whether, and if so under what conditions, to pursue the opportunity outlined in the report of the Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission. Further evidence of open minds was seen when, at the end of the second weekend, we formed an ‘opinion line’ on our thinking a that stage in the process. A continuous line across the room showed, while some had firmed up their opinion at both ends, most were still undecided.
|
November 18, 2016
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
Nuclear Citizens Jury |
Leave a comment
17 Nov 16, BHP Billiton’s AGM | Thursday 17th November at 11 am | Brisbane Convention & Exhibition Centre
At th BHP Billiton Limited AGM in Brisbane this Thursday, dissident shareholders will challenge the company’s board over its response to the Samarco tailings dam disaster. The AGM is being held twelve months on from the disastrous collapse of the Fundão mining waste (‘tailings’) dam at the Samarco iron ore mine in Minas Gerais, Brazil, which is 50-50 owned by BHP Billiton and Brazilian mining giant Vale.
“The dam break led to the destruction of all forms of life in the region. Mud covered everything, resulting in 20 deaths and unmeasurable environmental destruction. We have seen whole communities destroyed by BHP Billiton and Vale’s operations. They have lost everything, without receiving any real compensation. Instead of reparations for the victims, what is becoming evident is the blatant corporate capture of our government by transnational companies”, said Rodrigo de Castro Amédée Péret, of the Churches and Mining Network in Latin America who attended the BHP Billiton London AGM.
The collapsed waste dam killed twenty people [1], left 700 people homeless and polluted hundreds of kilometres of the Rio Doce river valley. Following the 5 November, 2015 disaster, MAB (People Affected by Dams), a coalition of local communities impacted by Brazil’s thousands of dam projects, made four key demands of Samarco and parent companies BHP Billiton and Vale [2].
Natalie Lowrey, of Australia’s Mineral Policy Institute, said, “BHP Billiton and its associates at Samarco are ignoring those most affected – the people whose lives and livelihoods have been devastated by last year’s tailings dam collapse. The demands being made by MAB, the social movement of people affected by dams, should be accepted. People want meaningful participation in decision-making about the clean-up and compensation, and for everyone who has been affected to be recognised – the companies shouldn’t be picking and choosing who gets help.”
Representatives of communities impacted by the broken dam disaster reiterated these demands at BHP Billiton’s London AGM on 20 October 2016 [3][4]. They were unsatisfied with the company’s responses. A panel of inquiry was set up to assess the cause of the waste dam collapse without attributing blame, they released a report in August 2016 [5].
Richard Harkinson, of London Mining Network, said, “BHP Billiton appears to be leading on international lobbying for the industry’s ‘learning lessons’ without regulatory change. The panel’s report [6] questioned the efficacy of changes in waste dam design and the sequence of its modifications, and poor management particularly throughout 2011-12, whereby the bases for failure were established through failure and compounded through avoiding good practice.”
On the day of the company’s London AGM, the Brazilian prosecutor’s office charged 26 people for their alleged roles in the disaster, 21 for qualified homicide. This included BHP Billiton and Vale executives on the Samarco board, including a minority who have now left [7]. London Mining Network and the Mineral Policy Institute welcomed this development as a step towards justice [8].
Notes Continue reading →
November 18, 2016
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, environment, politics international |
Leave a comment
Burning country not only maintains its health but makes a statement that country is being cared for. The “biggest estate on earth” didn’t happen by chance, rather, through good fire management practises, the land was kept in good order, a bit like housekeeping.
It’s time to invest in Indigenous carbon farming on Aboriginal lands, Guardian, Rowan Foley. 16 Nov 16
Australian businesses can take action on climate change by supporting Indigenous carbon farming while contributing to sustainable development goals.
Here’s a touch of irony in the fact the Australian government has invested $200m in the international Green Climate Fund, a United Nations fund to assist developing countries in adapting to and mitigating the effects of climate change.
There is, however, no equivalent investment fund by the government, or corporate Australia, towards developing sustainable economies on Aboriginal lands through one of those mitigation practices, namely carbon farming.
Investment in a sustainable Aboriginal carbon industry would directly impact climate change, Indigenous poverty and the management of traditional lands and waters. These are all key parts of meeting Australia’s commitment to the sustainable development goals (SDGs), specifically SDG13 (climate action), as well as SDG8 (decent work and economic growth), SDG11 (sustainable cities and communities), SDG14 (life below water) and SDG15 (life on land). Continue reading →
November 18, 2016
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
aboriginal issues, AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, climate change - global warming |
Leave a comment
From Jay Weatherill’s Response to Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission Report
“I’m also excited about the many positive commercial opportunities that are on the table for South Australia in nuclear medicine around the SAHMRI cyclotron.”
This IS one positive outcome from this long drawn out process. ra ra http://nuclear.yoursay.sa.gov.au/news/get-to-know-nuclear-discover-discuss-decide-government-delivers-response-to-nuclear-fuel-cycle-royal-commission-report
November 16, 2016
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
health, South Australia, technology |
Leave a comment
Ben Heard has achieved Australian and global fame, in his pro nuclear lobbying, and especially in running the website Decarbonise SA. Purporting to be a climate action site, Decarbonise SA has in reality been dedicated to the nuclear industry.
Anyway, Heard is moving on now – to a new front – a supposedly environmental Bright New World, as Heard describes it:
a new environmental NGO born and based here in South Australia with a global outlook and ambition
We are a registered not-for-profit organisation, governed by an independent board, and pursuing tax-deductible gift-recipient status.
It’s all about environment, biodiversity, natural resources – and just one tiny mention of nuclear :
tired of the junk-science approach to nuclear that typifies the environmentalist mainstream.
But he does thank well known nuclear lobbyists Atomic Insights, and The Actinide Age for their help.
And he does mention thee goal of his new organisation:
Our immediate job is to bring forward a strong “Yes” message for proceeding to next steps in investigating a used fuel service in South Australia.
November 16, 2016
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, spinbuster |
Leave a comment
16 Nov 16 On Monday, Premier Jay Weatherill announced that the absence of bipartisanship and broad social consent meant that the Government is unable to further progress investigations into a high level international waste disposal facility for South Australia.
Yesterday, the Premier delivered the State Government’s full response to the Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission, supporting 9 of 12 recommendations, a copy of the Government’s response is available here: nuclear.yoursay.sa.gov.au
November 16, 2016
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
politics, South Australia |
Leave a comment
Daniel Wills, State Political Editor, The Advertiser November 15, 2016 A THIRD of lower-house Liberal MPs have been ejected from Question Time and Premier Jay Weatherill has shielded four ministers from calls for them to personally back his plans for a nuclear referendum, as a toxic debate over the industry blew up in State Parliament.
Just 24 hours after Mr Weatherill pushed for a dateless referendum on SA approving a nuclear storage industry, he told Parliament the Government would not seek to change existing state legislation, which bans a dump being set up, or advocate any shift in federal laws…….
The Opposition sought to expose Labor divisions, including a union movement in public revolt, by calling on a string of ministers to publicly back Mr Weatherill’s nuclear plan.
Left faction ministers Susan Close and Leon Bignell, as well as the Right’s Stephen Mullighan, yesterday deferred Liberal questions on their personal views about nuclear to Mr Weatherill.
Independent Regional Development Minister Geoff Brock rose to his feet to give an answer to a Liberal question about plans for a nuclear dump, before Mr Weatherill stepped in to take it.
“There is a cabinet decision and all cabinet ministers support it,” Mr Weatherill said.
Opposition treasury spokesman Rob Lucas said Mr Weatherill had “taken the extraordinary step of gagging his ministers” and was desperate to “cover up the deep divisions in the Labor Party”.
Earlier, Speaker Michael Atkinson removed seven of the 21 Liberals in the Lower House, including Mr Marshall and other senior frontbenchers over rowdy interjections.
Mr Weatherill said the Liberals were divided over Mr Marshall’s rejection of the dump and being opportunistic by refusing to entertain further public debate on a potentially lucrative industry…. http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/liberal-mps-ejected-from-sa-parliament-during-debate-over-nuclear-waste-dump/news-story/552eb707f54fef48488b6cc0d4189d14
November 16, 2016
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
politics, South Australia |
Leave a comment
Premier Jay Weatherill backs expansion of uranium mining in South Australia, Daniel Wills State Political Editor, The Advertiser November 15, 2016 PREMIER Jay Weatherill has backed an expansion of uranium mining in the state, as recommended by a Royal Commission, while also continuing to explore the prospect of a nuclear dump.
A day after floating long-term plans for a referendum on a high-level nuclear waste dump, Mr Weatherill today addressed the Royal Commission findings in Parliament.
Mr Weatherill rejected recommendations urging he talk to the Federal Government about removing legal bans on uranium enrichment and nuclear power in Australia.
He also rejected a recommendation that the State Government remove state legislation stopping an “orderly, detailed and thorough analysis” of establishing nuclear waste storage in SA.
Recommendations accepted include simplifying mining approvals for uranium and backing more scientific studies of where ores can be uncovered…..
November 16, 2016
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
NUCLEAR ROYAL COMMISSION 2016, politics |
1 Comment
Protesting both the proposed nuclear waste storage facility and the Nuclear Fuel Cycle Symposium, activists on Monday described Premier Jay Weatherill’s proposal as “ludicrous” and potentially a threat to the future of the state.
“If we had a repeat of this year’s storms, there is no guarantee there wouldn’t be an accident,” protester Janett Jackson said. “You can’t ever guarantee there won’t be a storm like that again.
“We had an earthquake south of Alice Springs this year which measured six on the Richter scale. We’re talking about building a dump and saying that there is never ever going to be another earthquake. It’s a ludicrous comment to make.” Activist Susan Brame wrote a song for the protest and asked the Government to consider the lasting harm to the indigenous communities, especially less than 60 years after nuclear tests were conducted in the north of the state.
“It is so insulting to the Aboriginal people, after everything they have been through with Maralinga,” Ms Brame said. “It is such a slap in the face to them to seriously consider bringing the world’s most toxic waste to this state. They have been in total despair about this.”
For the protesters, international examples of what can go wrong when nuclear storage facilities fail are hitting too close to home. Ms Jackson said the February 2014 fire at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in New Mexico was evidence that human error can never be discounted,“That accident occurred in 2014 and cost more than $500m to repair and the dump is still closed down,” Ms Jackson said.
“If that happened to us our taxes would have to pay for it, which would eat into any profit Jay Weatherill thinks we’ll get. Economically it’s not viable”
November 16, 2016
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
opposition to nuclear, South Australia |
1 Comment
Liberal policy guru urged SA to go nuclear Tom Richardson http://indaily.com.au/news/local/2016/11/15/liberal-policy-guru-urged-sa-to-go-nuclear/ The state Liberal Party’s new policy director is a long-time nuclear advocate who personally called for the establishment of a nuclear waste dump in a submission to the Scarce Royal Commission. Steven Marshall’s Opposition has staunchly rejected any further investigation of a potential high-level repository.
But Richard Yeeles, a former corporate affairs manager with BHP Billiton and Western Mining Corporation who has recently run his own advisory firm, struck a very different tone when the State Government sought submissions on its royal commission proposal early last year.
“I commend the South Australian Government for initiating this inquiry,” wrote Yeeles, who has also previously worked as a chief of staff for Liberal leaders Dale Baker, Dean Brown and John Olsen.
In his lengthy 270-plus page submission to the subsequent inquiry, he urged the Government to “offer to host a national facility for storage and disposal of Australia’s own low and intermediate-level radioactive waste with the ultimate aim of securing Federal Government support for hosting an international radioactive waste management facility in South Australia”. Continue reading →
November 16, 2016
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
politics, South Australia |
Leave a comment
Yet the Premier has now overturned the SA Citizens’ Jury on Nuclear Waste’s verdict with his decision to continue to promote his plan to import high-level nuclear waste. His overturning of the jury’s verdict will worsen public distrust of government.
The citizen’s jury was emphatic in its rejection of the proposed nuclear dump – 70 per cent argued that it should not proceed “under any circumstances”.They clearly explained their reasons, including respect for Aboriginal traditional owners, scepticism about fanciful economic claims, concerns that the royal commission and the government downplayed environmental and public health risks, and distrust that the government could deliver the project on time and on budget.
The Premier justified his decision to overturn the jury’s verdict by referring to a ‘Community Views Report’ released on Sunday, reflecting the results of a statewide consultation process.
But his take on the report was extremely selective.
The Premier noted that 43 per cent of people questioned in surveys and focus groups supported further consideration of the nuclear waste dump proposal whereas 37 per cent were opposed.
He failed to note that many other people made their voice heard during the community consultation process.
Overall, 4365 people were opposed to further consideration of the proposal while only 3032 supported further consideration.
The Premier completely ignored the other findings of the Community Views Report. Fifty-three per cent of respondents opposed the plan to import high-level nuclear waste while just 31 per cent supported the plan.
Over three-quarters of Aboriginal respondents opposed the plan.
The community consultation process found that only 20 per cent of respondents were confident that nuclear waste could be transported and stored safely, while 70 percent were not confident.
The consultation process found that the number of people confident in the government’s ability to regulate any new nuclear industry activities in SA (2125 people) was barely half the number who were not confident (4190 people).
The consultation process found that 66 per cent of respondents were not confident that a nuclear waste import project would bring significant economic benefits to SA.
November 16, 2016
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
NUCLEAR ROYAL COMMISSION 2016, politics, wastes |
Leave a comment
The formal Government response to the Nuclear Royal Commission final report released today shows how little value was received from nearly $10 million of taxpayers’ money, according to Mark Parnell MLC, Parliamentary Leader, Greens SA.
“From Day One, it was clear that nuclear power was too expensive, nuclear fuel processing was unviable and uranium mining was already in the doldrums, with mines moth-balled because they were losing money.
“It was also clear from Day One that the real agenda was about establishing a nuclear waste dump. This is the same dump that was overwhelmingly dumped by the Premier’s own Citizens’ Jury. It’s also the same dump that was promoted in the 1990s by the Royal Commission’s own business consultants.
“Despite clear community opposition, clear Parliamentary opposition and even opposition in his own ranks, the Premier seems hell-bent on flogging the dead horse.
The Government response says it “won’t pursue policy change or legislative change at this time, but will continue to facilitate discussion”. The Premier is also wedded to an expensive and doomed-to-fail referendum.
“The Greens urge the Premier not to waste any more scarce public funds on this folly and to withdraw gracefully. The idea of keeping an entire administrative unit of Government busy talking about something that will never happen is just ludicrous”, concluded Mark Parnell.
November 16, 2016
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
politics, South Australia |
Leave a comment
, Analysis — Daniel Wills, The Advertiser, 
, State Political Editor Daniel Wills, The Advertiser, 
Antinuclear 