Warren Mundine, a member and former National President of the ALP, and co-convener of the Australian Uranium Association’s Indigenous Dialogue Group, has been promoting the nuclear industry recently. Unfortunately he turns a blind eye to the industry’s crude racism, a problem that ought to be core business for the Indigenous Dialogue Group.
Mundine could have mentioned the legacy of uranium mining in the Wiluna region of WA; to pick one of many examples. Uranium exploration in the region in the 1980s left a legacy of pollution and contamination. Greatly elevated radiation levels have been recorded despite the area being ‘cleaned’ a decade ago. Even after the ‘clean up’, the site was left with rusting drums containing uranium ore. A sign reading “Danger − low level radiation ore exposed” was found lying face down in bushes.
In August 2000, coordinator of the Wiluna-based Marruwayura Aboriginal Corporation Steve Syred said that until 1993, 100−150 people were living three kilometres from the spot where high radiation levels were recorded. Syred told the Kalgoorlie Miner that the Aboriginal community had unsuccessfully resisted uranium exploration in the area in the early 1980s. Since then many people had lived in the area while the Ngangganawili Aboriginal Corporation was based near the contaminated site. Elders still hunted in the area.
Another example ignored by Mundine was in late March when the NSW government passed legislation that excluded uranium from provisions of the NSW Aboriginal Land Rights Act 1983 thus stripping Aboriginal Land Councils of any say in uranium mining.
Yet another example ignored by Mundine was the 2011 amendments to the S.A. Roxby Downs Indenture Act 1982. This is the legislation that governs operations at the Olympic Dam uranium and copper mine and retains exemptions from the S.A. Aboriginal Heritage Act. Traditional Owners were not even consulted in the amendments or exemptions. The S.A. government’s spokesperson in Parliament said: “BHP were satisfied with the current arrangements and insisted on the continuation of these arrangements, and the government did not consult further than that.”
That disgraceful performance illustrates a broader pattern. Aboriginal land rights and heritage protections are feeble at the best of times. But the legal rights and protections are repeatedly stripped away whenever they get in the way of nuclear or mining interests. The Olympic Dam mine is largely exempt from the S.A. Aboriginal Heritage Act and any uranium mines in NSW are to be exempt from provisions of the NSW Aboriginal Land Rights Act. Likewise, sub-section 40(6) of the Commonwealth’s Aboriginal Land Rights Act exempts the Ranger uranium mine in the N.T. from the Act.
Mundine claims that Australia has “a legal framework to negotiate equitably with the traditional owners on whose land many uranium deposits are found”. That claim is disingenuous.
Native Title rights were extinguished with the stroke of a pen by the Howard government to seize land for a radioactive waste dump in South Australia. Aboriginal heritage laws and Aboriginal land rights are being trashed with the current push to dump in the Northern Territory. Federal Resources Minister Martin Ferguson’s National Radioactive Waste Management Act overrides the Aboriginal Heritage Act, sidesteps the Aboriginal Land Rights Act, and allows for the imposition of a dump on Aboriginal land even in the absence of any consultation with or consent from Traditional Owners.
David Ross, Director of the Central Land Council, noted in a March 14 media release: “This legislation is shameful, it subverts processes under the [Aboriginal] Land Rights Act and is clearly designed to reach the outcome of a dump being located on Aboriginal land in the Northern Territory, whether that’s the best place for it or not. This legislation preserves the Muckaty nomination without acknowledging the dissent and conflict amongst the broader traditional owner group about the process and the so-called agreement. The passage of this legislation will further inflame the tensions and divisions amongst families in Tennant Creek, and cause great stress to many people in that region.”
A small number of Traditional Owners support the N.T. dump proposal. However most are opposed and the Northern Territory Government supports that opposition, key trade unions including the Australia Council of Trade Unions, church groups, medical and health organisations, and environmental groups. If push comes to shove, there will be a blockade at the site to prevent construction of the dump.
A pro bono legal team is assisting Traditional Owners with their legal challenge against the nomination of the Muckaty site. At a Federal Court hearing on March 27, a Commonwealth lawyer argued that the government’s legislation allows the nomination of a dump site to stand even if the evidence regarding traditional ownership is false.
These patterns are evident in other countries. North American Indigenous activist Winona LaDuke from the Anishinabe Nation told the Indigenous World Uranium Summit in 2006: “The greatest minds in the nuclear establishment have been searching for an answer to the radioactive waste problem for fifty years, and they’ve finally got one: haul it down a dirt road and dump it on an Indian reservation”.
Here in Australia the situation is scarcely any better than it was in the 1950s when the British were exploding nuclear bombs on Aboriginal land. Which brings us to another of Mundine’s blind spots. He could have mentioned the latest ‘clean up’ of the Maralinga nuclear test site, which was done on the cheap. Nuclear engineer and whistleblower Alan Parkinson said of the ‘clean-up’: “What was done at Maralinga was a cheap and nasty solution that wouldn’t be adopted on white-fellas land.”
Mundine’s claim to support Aboriginal empowerment is contradicted by his consistent failure to speak out when mining and nuclear interests and governments that support those interests disempower Aboriginal people.
LIFT URANIUM MINING BAN, Pauline Hanson’s ONE NATION, 23 Jan 19,NSW One Nation will end the uranium mining ban which has been in place since 1986.
Across our western border, South Australia has been able to reap the benefits of this billion dollar national industry….. There are too many government regulations holding back the NSW economy, with the uranium mining ban one of the dumbest.
With power prices skyrocketing, the mining sector has called for the nuclear option with hopes a high-level review could end a ban on the prohibited energy source.
The Minerals Council of Australia has seized on the upcoming review of environmental protection laws under which nuclear power is banned.
Chief executive Tania Constable said removing the four words — “a nuclear power plant” — in one section of the law would allow the industry to be considered for development.
Federal Environment Minister Melissa Price said while the extent of the review had not yet been determined it must examine the full operation of the laws.
“The review will involve extensive consultation and will consider all ideas put forward by industry, environment and community groups to improve and strengthen national environmental law,” she said.
Ms Price said under law the review of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act had to be completed by October.
But Opposition leader Bill Shorten ruled out any changes under a Labor government.
“Labor has no plans to build nuclear power plants, full stop. We will deliver more renewables and cheaper power for Australians, and we will do it without building nuclear power plants in our cities and towns,” he said.
Ms Constable said that along with upgrades to existing coal-fired generators, nuclear power was a “commonsense approach” to lowering power prices and also reducing emissions.
In December, Labor signed off on its new national platform which states “Labor will … prohibit the establishment of nuclear power plants and all other stages of the nuclear fuel cycle”.
About 30 countries rely on nuclear power, with France generating nearly 75 per cent of its electricity that way.
The World Nuclear Association lists Hungary, Slovakia and Ukraine as generating more than half from nuclear, while Belgium, Sweden, Slovenia, Bulgaria, Switzerland, Finland and the Czech Republic use it for more than one-third of their power.
Prime Minister Scott Morrison said he was open to changing the law but wanted to be sure of the economic case.
“I’m not too much into an ideological debate about from what source it comes, I just want to make sure it turns up and that it brings power prices down,” he said. “The only work I have seen on that … is that (lower prices) is only achieved with very significant government subsidies.”
Susan Craig Fight To Stop Nuclear Waste Dump In Flinders Ranges SA, 18 Jan 19,
Federal Labor tell us the nuclear waste is TOO DANGEROUS for Lucas Heights, NSW, “we’ve got to get it out of there because it’s too dangerous to have it in densely populated metropolitan Sydney.
Federal Liberal tell us it’s PERFECTLY SAFE. It’s confounding that a post code can change the risk level of nuclear waste!
Both Scott and Bill are on the same bus. They refuse to make this an election issue. South Australians need to get on our own bus and demand that this issue be brought out into the open.
The current plan for a nuclear waste dump for South Australia is dangerous. Intermediate level nuclear waste is 100% fatal, after exposure life expectancy is around 4 – 6 weeks, it’s radioactive for 10,000 years and it will be stored above ground in a tin shed. It’s time for a cohesive, intelligent worlds best practice plan be developed to keep all Australian’s and our environment safe, now and into the future.
Labor will strengthen the law to protect Australia’s Environment and Heritage – TONY BURKE
Environmental wins at the National Labor Conference, Independent Australia By Stephen Williams | 13 January 2019Stephen Williams questions national co-convenor Felicity Wade of the Labor Environment Action Network (LEAN) about new Labor policy.
“………Our goal was to ensure climate action was no longer an issue to be used tactically, becoming instead an article of faith. We believe a deep-rooted response to the environmental challenges of the 21st Century is essential to the long-term survival of a modern social-democratic party.
At the 2015 Labor National Conference, LEAN won the commitments to 50% renewable energy and 45% emission reductions by 2030. But it was just a few days ago, at the 2018 National Conference, that our real goal was won. Watching the debate on the floor, there was confidence and enthusiasm. Labor not only believes climate change is real, but that it is core business.
Party heavyweights lined up to affirm their commitment to turning around the “climate emergency”, as one of the motions described it. The continued challenge of the proposed Adani coal mine in Queensland is still outstanding. LEAN believes that while Labor will continue to support existing coal operations for some time, allowing a new, huge coal basin to be opened up is both risky and undermines perceptions of our commitment to climate change.
LEAN’s next task is to rebuild commitment to the natural environment in the same way. On issues of the natural environment, it is more about remembering something lost, rather than embracing something new. Visionary environmental policy has a Labor history and this week’s commitment to a new environment Act and an independent Environment Protection Authority are the first steps in reclaiming this.
The current environmental legislation, the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth) (EPBC), is from the Howard era. It is primarily a tool to facilitate development, not to protect the environment. What’s more, it annoys business, and costs money by creating delays and confusion, little of which translates into good environmental outcomes. The only proactive aspects of the Act create lists of environmental threats with no power to protect anything or make a difference to real-world outcomes.
Since the EPBC Act was legislated in 1999, the number of threatened species and ecosystems has increased by 30%, with three animals going extinct. About 7.4 million hectares of threatened-species habitat (more than the size of Tasmania) has been cleared. Only 0.3% (21 of 6,100 developments assessed by the Act) have been rejected for unacceptable risks to the environment.
Australia has the highest rate of mammal extinctions in the world and is the only developed nation in the world’s top ten land-clearers. About 3,000 Australians die each year due to air pollution, plastics clog our waterways, while the community’s efforts to recycle are not matched by government-led national responses to ensure the waste is re-used.
We need more power at the federal level to stem these losses. ……..
When asked by our campaigners how they felt about climate change policy, the message they sent back to the party was unequivocal: 370 local ALP branches endorsed our call for 50% renewables by 2030 and credible emission-reduction targets.
Peta Credlin’s preselection could be the spark that blows up the Liberal party, Guardian, Oliver Yates , 9 Jan 19, Credlin has put short term political interests, and the interests of the coal industry, before the future of our country What better example is there that the Liberal party must split than the proposed nomination of Peta Credlin for the seat of Mallee.If, as Credlin says, “climate change remains Malcolm Turnbull’s kryptonite”, then her preselection could just be the Liberal party’s dynamite. The split already exists, but for now, it’s being held together with sticky tape and string. And Credlin’s preselection could well be the spark that lights the fuse, and blows the whole thing up.
The Liberal party is suffering an existential crisis. And no other issue defines this crisis like the looming threat to our safety and security caused by inaction on climate change. Credlin understands this and has used her position as a climate change-denying, hard-right mouthpiece of the Murdoch empire to advance her own political interests, and the interests of the coal industry.
She’s consistently claimed climate change is a political hoax, and used her position in the media to undermine a sitting prime ministerand any energy policy supported by the Coalition party room that does not involve more coal and the end of renewables.
She doesn’t represent real liberal views, and if she appeals to what’s left of the “base”, then many people who used to vote Liberal will keep moving for the exits.
Inspired by Donald Trump, Credlin has argued Australia should tear up the Paris agreement, tear up any sensible national energy guarantee. Credlin has demanded taxpayers’ money go to the Adani coalmine and be used to build new coal-fired power stations. It’s madness.
Australians don’t want this. We would prefer a Great Barrier Reef, renewable energy and a future we can survive and thrive in.
These views are so ignorant – their political manifestation through Tony Abbott, Craig Kelly and their ilk – that it presents a grave economic and security threat to Australia’s future. And it could be the final death knell to the Liberal party.
Credlin’s demonstrated lack of understanding of the serious climate emergency we face, or even the basic economics of power production costs are breathtaking. She promotes the view that climate change is some leftwing conspiracy and that the science is rubbish.
These views need to be called for what they are: dangerous.
In her media roles, Credlin has even attacked the scientific foundation for energy and climate policy. From the desk at Sky, she announced her displeasure that former prime minister Malcolm Turnbull asked chief scientist Alan Finkel for real consideration of the climate change transition and energy policy. Instead she demanded a manufactured report devoid of reality………
Australians know it’s getting hotter every summer and see the increases in extreme weather. Report after report, overflowing with scientific evidence, traditionally a solid foundation for investment and public policy making, has been abandoned by the federal Liberal party. We understand how this will threaten our families, economy and security, and we must act to provide people with a real liberal alternative.
Credlin, Abbott and the rest of the hard-right’s “commitment to coal” is entirely political. The calculation they’ve made is that their short-term political interests, and the interests of the coal industry, are more important than the future of our country, our people and holistically the environment we all share.
It is essential now that real liberals stand against this reckless game of Russian roulette the hard right are playing with our future. If not, they too will adorn the walls as climate change deniers, who, despite all the evidence, refused to act.
Woomera not in contention for nuclear storage facility, The Transcontinental, Marco Balsamo, 3 Jan 19
The Department of Industry, Innovation and Science (DIIS) has dismissed any possibility of reconsidering the Woomera Protected Area (WPA) as a site for the national radioactive waste management facility.
With ongoing operations at the site conducted by the Department of Defence, DIIS described a nuclear waste facility as an “incompatible land use”.
Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) stores 10,000 drums of low and intermediate level waste in a hangar at Evetts Field, 1.3 kilometres from the Woomera Range head.
Defence also stores 35 cubic metres of intermediate level waste in a bunker 5km down range.
However, a DIIS spokesperson said the 122,000-square kilometre military testing range was not suitable…….
Two sites in Kimba and one near Hawker have been nominated to host the potential facility, but the selection process has been delayed, as the Federal Court is set to hear the Barngarla Determination Aboriginal Corporation v District Council of Kimba case this month. …..
Traditional owners lodged an Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) complaint in December 2018, alleging a fundamentally flawed process in the consideration of the site near Hawker.
Twenty years on, only the names have changed, The Age 1 January 2019 The annual release of the federal Cabinet papers is usually a chance to reflect on issues long since settled. … the release today by the National Archives of Australia of the papers from John Howard’s cabinet deliberations of 1996 and 1997.
A string of issues that demanded the attention of Mr Howard and his senior ministers are still with us. And still causing trouble for the government.
The most obvious is climate change and finding a way to reduce Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions.
The Cabinet papers reveal how the Howard government clearly rejected the advice of its most senior ministries that the most effective and efficient method to deal with the issue was via a price signal with an emissions trading scheme.
It would take a decade for Mr Howard to change his mind, taking a trading scheme – along with the Labor Party – to the 2007 election.
Howard government told without a carbon price, emissions would rise, The Age, By Shane Wright, 1 January 2019The Howard government was urged more than 20 years ago to consider an emissions trading scheme, while its signature plans to deal with Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions were considered by its own departments to be merely aimed at deflecting global criticism.
As the Morrison government continues to fight a debilitating internal battle over how to deal with climate change, previously secret papers from the 1990s reveal a suite of major government departments said the most effective and efficient way to deal with greenhouse gases was to impose a carbon price.
Cabinet papers from 1996 and 1997 released on Tuesday by the National Archives reveal the beginnings of the Howard government’s drawn-out response to the threat posed by rising greenhouse gas emissions and the way some of those issues are still playing out in the Morrison government.
Ahead of the expected adoption of the Kyoto Protocol in December 1997, there were deep concerns within the government about how it may affect Australia with its large coal exports, heavy dependence on coal-fired power stations and increasing LNG production.
Government departments headed by Prime Minister and Cabinet, Treasury and Foreign Affairs fleshed out the details of a series of proposals backed by the government in September 1997 in a bid to deal with Australia’s emissions.
The co-ordinating document produced by the departments, which were aiming to finalise a package discussed at cabinet earlier in the month, made clear the bureaucracy did not believe the government’s plans would go nearly far enough in cutting emissions but may be sufficient to deflect international criticism.
“None of the packages presented here would achieve the stabilisation of emissions at 1990 levels,” they said.
“Rather, they are aimed at deflecting criticism that Australia is not fully committed to reducing its emissions.”
The departments costed a series of proposals which would ultimately become part of the government’s official response to climate change…….
But the departments, which acknowledged the government’s opposition to a price signal, said these would ultimately be expensive initiatives which would not deliver a real impact on the nation’s overall emissions profile.
“The most effective way to reduce emissions would be to combine significant price signals (either general or sectoral increases in taxes on greenhouse producing activities), information so firms and individuals can reduce greenhouse production, opportunities to invest in carbon sinks and some degree of compulsion to address areas where markets cannot be made to work effectively,” they said…….
While a small number of Coalition MPs have backed subsidies for new coal-fired power stations, the cabinet documents from 1997 canvassed ways to use emission standards to effectively end brown coal-fired stations and encourage more gas into the system.
Labor has pledged to try to revive the energy guarantee and while it has ruled out a carbon tax it is considering an “emissions-trading type scheme” for high-polluting industries which are likely to be in the manufacturing and liquefied and natural gas sectors.
The days roll on and 2018 is about to be in the past tense.
As ever the year saw highs, lows and flatlines. It also saw sustained and successful resistance to the nuclear industry in Australia.
This note is a snapshot, not a definitive list, but I wanted to capture some of our collective efforts and achievements so in a quiet moment we can reflect and recharge – and know that we are making a real difference.
Thanks and solidarity to all – and best wishes for a good break and time with people and in places that freshen the spirit. I look forward to working with you all in season 2019.
Uranium: Less is being ripped and shipped
Kakadu: the clean-up of the Ranger site is underway – Mirarr native title of the region was formally recognised – Rio Tinto have accepted their responsibility to clean up – there was a calendar and a series of events around the country to mark twenty years since the Jabiluka blockade
uranium remains stalled and actively contested in WA: 2018 saw a decade since then Premier Barnett announced a fast tracked uranium sector that would be “iron ore on steroids” – there are no mines but there is a major legal challenge to the Yeelirrie project, procedural challenge to Mulga Rock and community resistance to the four proposed projects with actions at AgMs, project critiques, Walkatjurra Walkabout and more
Qld Labor reaffirmed its opposition to uranium mining at its state conference
Radioactive waste: Under pressure and delayed
the federal plan for a national waste facility in regional SA is highly contested, behind schedule and increasingly uncertain
the issue was pushed ahead of the state election and SA Labor has subsequently adopted a good policy position
there is growing civil society awareness and engagement with the issue – especially through our trade union partners
the Barngarla people were formally awarded native title over the Kimba sites in June and have taken legal action over deficiencies in the Feds consultation processes
Adnyamathanha resistance to the proposed Flinders Ranges site is strong and they have lodged a complaint on the plan with the Australian Human Rights Commission
community resistance at both sites is sustained and strong with high levels of engagement and regular actions, events and media profile
Federal Labor policy has a long way to go but at its national conference in December Labor moved from a policy position dominated by sites and place to one of standards and process
Standing Strong – the story of the successful community fight against the earlier plan for an international radioactive waste dump in SA was launched and learned from
there was early and strong opposition to chatter around other potential radioactive waste sites – especially at Brewarrina (NSW) and Leonora (WA)
Nuclear weapons: the cold war is reheating and support for a weapons ban grows
ICAN – the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons – has continued to build on its 2017 Nobel Peace Prize profile
there was sustained outreach and awareness initiatives, including a bike ride from Melbourne to Canberra
there is growing international support for the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons with more nations signing and ratifying the ban
federal Labor committed to sign and ratify the ban treaty at its national conference in Adelaide in December – a major step forward
the Peace Boat visited Australian waters and cities in January/February and the Black Mist, Burnt Country Maralinga exhibition continued touring
Broader nuclear free efforts
ANFA – the Australian Nuclear Free Alliance – had a good gathering in the Adelaide Hills in October and there was clear recognition of the role of First Nation people in the atomic resistance with awards to crew in WA, Aunty Sue in SA and Jeffrey Lee gaining the German based Nuclear Free Future award in the global Resistance category
anniversaries were marked with actions, events and reflection – including Fukushima, Chernobyl, Hiroshima and Maralinga
people engaged in state and federal processes including Senate Estimates, Senate Inquiries into radioactive waste siting and mine rehabilitation, ARPANSA Codes of Practice and more
folks engaged with ALP state and federal conferences, the ACTU Congress, many union forums, SoS, the Sustainable Living Festival and more
we remained connected and updated via the efforts of Christina Macpherson, Maelor at ACF, Jim Green at WISE, KA at CCWA and Walkatjurra, WGAR news, 3CR’s Radioactive Show, Understory and more
Looking ahead to 2019 – Another big year ahead folks – and one where we consolidate, defend and grow
Challengesinclude:
the forever struggle of resourcing and capacity
pro-nuke voices pushing small modular reactors (SMRs) and seeking to overturn the ban on domestic nuclear power
Mineral Council of Australia and others seeking the removal of uranium mining as a ‘trigger’ action in the federal EPBC Act
We need to:
better braid the uranium story and struggle into the wider dirty energy-fracking- fossil fuel narrative
keep Rio Tinto and the regulators focussed and genuine re the best possible rehab outcomes at Ranger and keep the door shut to the uranium sector in WA
support affected communities facing radioactive waste dump plans and push federal Labor to adopt a different approach
pressure and support federal Labor to follow through on its commitment to sign and ratify the nuclear weapons ban
make Australian uranium companies operating overseas – often in jurisdictions with low governance – accountable for their impacts
Labor sets the right course on nuclear disarmament, https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/labor-sets-the-right-course-on-nuclear-disarmament-20181224-p50o22.html,By Gem Romuld, 27 December 2018On the final afternoon of the recent 48th Labor national conference, Anthony Albanese took to the podium to announce that a future Labor government will sign and ratify the UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons. He declared that “people who change the world are ones that are ambitious”, after three days of intense negotiations on nuclear policy among senior Labor parliamentarians.The Coalition government has not only refused to join the treaty, but boycotted the negotiating conference and opposed the process leading up to it. While claiming to wholeheartedly seek a world free of nuclear weapons, foreign affairs ministers Julie Bishop and Marise Payne have failed to act. Their preferred path is one that doesn’t challenge the nuclear-armed states, especially our powerful ally, and protects the status quo.
After words of caution from Senator Penny Wong and MP Richard Marles in October, supporters of the nuclear ban treaty within Labor had to move a mountain to get the leadership on side. Even with former foreign minister Gareth Evans warning against the treaty, out of deference to the United States, on the eve of the resolution the supportive majority won out. With 78 per cent of the federal caucus signed up to support the ban, 83 per cent of Labor voters on side, and two dozen unions adding their voice, Labor has a clear mandate.
Soon after the resolution passed unanimously, commentators rushed to dismiss the resolution as aspirational, ineffective and conditional upon whether nuclear-armed states join the treaty. This is not true; there are no binding caveats to the resolution. Labor must only “take account of” various factors ahead of signing and ratifying.
Conservatives within Labor tried to attach binding preconditions, but their attempts failed. As for whether the resolution is aspirational, in fact it is binding. Therefore, it is no longer a matter of whether a Labor government will join the TPNW – only when.
A recently published paper by Harvard Law School’s International Human Rights Clinic is clear that Australia joining the ban treaty would advance its stated goal of supporting nuclear disarmament without creating insurmountable legal obstacles to ongoing military relations with the United States. Australia signed up to the landmines and cluster munitions treaties when the United States did not, and still has not, signed on. The alliance relationship doesn’t bind us to include weapons of mass destruction in our defence policies. Further, the ANZUS Treaty contains no obligation to accept the policy of nuclear deterrence.
The threat posed by nuclear weapons is real and urgent. More than ever, our security depends on an effective rules-based international order and strong multilateral institutions. No nuclear-armed states have yet joined the treaty, but this will change. No treaty, whether on disarmament or human rights or climate change, has ever enjoyed universal support at the outset. Support is always built up over time. Monumental strides forward in human history rarely begin with all parties coming together to agree on a common course of action.
The majority of the world’s nations negotiated the TPNW based on their firm belief that it would have a profound impact on the behaviour of nuclear-armed states and their allies, even if its provisions would not, at the outset, be binding on those states. Treaties prohibiting other inhumane, indiscriminate weapons demonstrate this process; for example, the landmine ban treaty is widely regarded as a success, with massive reductions in use and production worldwide.
Within the nuclear weapon ban treaty’s first year of existence, money is moving. The Norwegian sovereign wealth fund and the largest Dutch pension fund have decided to exclude nuclear-weapon-producing companies from their investment portfolios, citing the treaty as their reason. The Australian Medical Association and the Australian Red Cross have urged the Australian government to sign and ratify the treaty as a humanitarian imperative. Cities within countries opposed to the treaty are also joining the call for national action, including Los Angeles, Toronto, Manchester, Melbourne and Sydney. The ban treaty is a powerful new tool for advocacy, and nuclear disarmament is back on the political agenda.
Since the treaty opened for signature in September 2017, 69 states have signed on and 19 have ratified. The 50th nation to deposit its instrument of ratification will enable the treaty to enter into force and become permanent international law. With dozens of nations currently undergoing domestic processes to sign and ratify, entry- into-force is expected by 2020.
It is beyond time for Australia to quit our role as nuclear enabler for the United States. The nuclear weapon ban treaty presents us with a persistent question; will we join the global majority and contribute to the consensus against these WMDs, or remain implicated in the nuclear threat? Labor’s commitment clears a pathway forward for the next Government.
Gem Romuld is the Australian director of the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons and a recipient of the 2017 Nobel Peace Prize.
Labor’s pledge to commit to nuclear disarmament puts the alternative party of government on the right side of history.
The gulf between the shenanigans of way too many politicians, and the growing urgency of grave and looming threats has rarely seemed wider. Action on crucial issues languishes while parliamentarians make naked grabs for power, acting in the interests only of themselves. Poor personal behaviour seems endemic. On the two unprecedented dangers looming over all humanity – nuclear war and climate disruption – Australia has been not just missing in action, but actively on the wrong side of history, part of the problem rather than the solution.
The government’s own figures demonstrate that our country, awash with renewable sun and wind, is way off track to meet even a third of its greenhouse gas emissions reduction target by 2030 – itself nowhere near enough.
Not only is nuclear disarmament stalled, but one by one, the agreements that reduced and constrained nuclear weapons, hard-won fruit of the end of the first cold war, are being trashed. All the nuclear-armed states are investing massively not simply in keeping their weapons indefinitely, but developing new ones that are more accurate, more deadly and more “usable”. The cold war is back, and irresponsible and explicit threats to use nuclear weapons have proliferated. Any positive effect that Australia might have on reducing nuclear weapons dangers from the supposed influence afforded us by our uncritical obsequiousness to the US is nowhere in sight. Our government has been incapable of asserting any independence even from the current most extreme, dysfunctional and unfit US administration. The US has recently renounced its previous commitments under the nuclear non-proliferation treaty (NPT); we have said nothing.
The one bright light in this gathering gloom is the 2017 UN treaty on the prohibition of nuclear weapons. For its role in helping to bring this historic treaty into being, the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (Ican) was awarded the Nobel peace prize for 2017 – the first to an entity born in Australia. This treaty provides the first comprehensive and categorical prohibition of nuclear weapons. It sets zero nuclear weapons as the clear and consistent standard for all countries and will help drive elimination of these worst weapons of mass destruction, just as the treaties banning biological and chemical weapons, landmines and cluster munitions have played a decisive role in progressing the elimination of those other indiscriminate and inhumane weapons. The treaty lays out a clear pathway for all states, with and without nuclear weapons, to fulfil their binding legal obligation to accomplish nuclear disarmament. It is currently the only such pathway.
Regrettably, the Australian government was the most active “weasel” in opposing the treaty’s development at every step and was one of the first to say it would not sign, even though we have signed every other treaty banning an unacceptable weapon.
Hence the Labor party’s commitment at its recent national conference in Adelaide that “Labor in government will sign and ratify the Ban Treaty” is an important and welcome step. It is a clear commitment, allowing no room for weaselling.
The considerations articulated alongside this commitment are fairly straightforward and consistent with the commitment. First, recognition of the need for “an effective verification and enforcement architecture” for nuclear disarmament. The treaty itself embodies this. Governments joining the treaty must designate a competent international authority “to negotiate and verify the irreversible elimination of nuclear weapons” and nuclear weapons programmes, “including the elimination or irreversible conversion of all nuclear-weapons-related facilities”. Australia should also push for the same standard for any nuclear disarmament that happens outside the treaty.
Second, the Labor resolution prioritises “the interaction of the Ban Treaty with the longstanding Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty”. The treaty has been carefully crafted to be entirely compatible with the NPT and explicitly reaffirms that the NPT “serves as a cornerstone of the nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation regime”, and that its full and effective implementation “has a vital role to play in promoting international peace and security”. All the governments supporting the treaty support the NPT, and the NPT itself enshrines a commitment for all its members to “pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament”. The UN secretary general, Antonio Guterres, and the International Committee of the Red Cross are among those who have affirmed that the treaty and the NPT are entirely consistent, complementary and mutually reinforcing. Even opponents of the treaty recognise that prohibition is an essential part of achieving and sustaining a world free of nuclear weapons.
Third, the Labor resolution refers to “Work to achieve universal support for the Ban Treaty.” This too is mirrored in one of the commitments governments take on in joining the treaty, to encourage other states to join, “with the goal of universal adherence of all States to the Treaty.”
An Australian government joining the treaty would enjoy wide popular support in doing so – an Ipsos poll last month found that 79% of Australians (and 83% of Labor voters) support, and less than 8% oppose, Australia joining the treaty.
Australia would also stop sticking out like a sore thumb among our southeast Asian and Pacific Island neighbours and be able to work more effectively with them. Brunei, Cook Islands, Fiji, Indonesia, Kiribati, Laos, New Zealand, Malaysia, Myanmar, Palau, Philippines, Samoa, Thailand, Timor-Leste, Tuvalu, Vanuatu and Vietnam have already signed the treaty.
Most importantly, joining the treaty and renouncing nuclear weapons would mean that Australia would become part of the solution rather than the problem of the acute existential peril that hangs over all of us while nuclear weapons exist, ready to be launched within minutes. Time is not on our side. Of course this crucial humanitarian issue should be above party politics. The commitment from the alternative party of government to join the treaty and get on the right side of history when Labor next forms government is to be warmly welcomed. It is to be hoped that the 78% of federal parliamentary Labor members who have put on record their support for Australia joining the treaty by signing Ican’s parliamentary pledge will help ensure Labor keeps this landmark promise.
• Dr Tilman Ruff is co-founder of the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (Ican) and Nobel peace prize winner (2017)
Documents reveal Australia’s secret arms deals with nations fighting Yemen’s bloody war, ABC News
By Dylan Welch,Kyle Taylor, Dan Oakes and Rebecca Trigger, ABC Investigations 13 Dec 2018,The Australian Government has approved the export of dozens of shipments of military items to Middle Eastern countries embroiled in the bloody Yemen war, a conflict dogged by accusations of war crimes and indiscriminate civilian killings.
Internal Defence Department documents obtained under Freedom of Information (FOI) and from parliamentary hearings reveal since the beginning of 2016, Canberra has granted at least 37 export permits for military-related items to the United Arab Emirates, and 20 to Saudi Arabia.
They are the two countries leading a coalition fighting a war against Houthi rebels in the Middle East’s poorest nation, Yemen.
Australia will spend $200 million between now and 2028 in order to make Australia the 10th-largest arms exporter in the world. It is currently the 20th largest.
The Government has tried to keep details of the exports secret, but New South Wales lawyer and human rights activist Kellie Tranter has spent a year trying to shed light on the sales. Continue reading →
Bill Shorten wins cautious agreement on foreign aid, recognising Palestine and nuclear ban treaty, SMH, By Michael Koziol 18 December 2018A federal Labor government will pursue the recognition of Palestine, a treaty banning nuclear weapons and an increase to foreign aid – but final decisions will be left for cabinet under an agreement struck between the party’s factions.Three controversial issues in the foreign relations portfolio were settled in backroom deals on Tuesday morning to ensure there were no contentious votes and Labor leader Bill Shorten ended the party’s national conference on a united note.The changes to Labor’s platform urge the next Labor government to recognise Palestine as a sovereign state as an “important priority”, but leaves the final decision to cabinet acting on expert advice.Labor has also given in-principle agreement to the United Nations nuclear ban treaty – but only after taking account of whether nuclear-armed states had signed up (so far none have) and whether they were abiding by the treaty’s terms…….
Senator Wong and defence spokesman Richard Marles led the negotiations, while the Left’s Anthony Albanese was heavily involved in the nuclear talks ……..
The controversial nuclear treaty bans states from using, producing or stockpiling nuclear weapons, and prohibits them from assisting any other state to engage in such activities.
Mr Marles – who has criticised the treaty as “the non-nuclear world thumbing its nose at the nuclear world” – said it was “no secret” some in Labor were sceptical about the treaty and its impact on Australia’s alliance with the US.
A Labor government would need to be “certain” the treaty would not endanger that alliance, Mr Marles told the conference, and it was essential there was a realistic pathway for nuclear powers to sign up.
According to the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, 69 states have signed the treaty, and 19 have ratified it into law. However, none of the nuclear weapons powers or nuclear-armed states have signed or ratified the treaty.
Coalition’s divide exposed at COAG energy meeting in Adelaide, ABC, By Casey Briggs 19 Dec 18, A meeting of Australia’s energy ministers had ended bitterly divided, with the country’s biggest Liberal-run state accusing the Commonwealth of blocking discussion on climate change.
New South Wales Energy Minister Don Harwin led a revolt over carbon emissions at today’s energy COAG meeting in Adelaide.
Antinuclear 