Indigenous Australians have been failed by the nation’s environmental protection laws, a review has found.
 Indigenous ‘tokenism’ in environment lawsHTTPS://WWW.BENDIGOADVERTISER.COM.AU/STORY/6841657/INDIGENOUS-TOKENISM-IN-ENVIRONMENT-LAWS/, Rebecca Gredley, 21 July 20, Indigenous Australians have been failed by the nation’s environmental protection laws, a review has found. Forrmer ACCC chairman Graeme Samuel on Monday released his interim review of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, which says the laws are not fit for purpose. The laws are supposed to recognise the role of Indigenous Australians in conservation, protect cultural places and promote the use of Indigenous biodiversity knowledge. But Professor Samuel says that’s not occurring. “Traditional knowledge is not valued,” he said.
“There is a culture of tokenism and symbolism…. Indigenous Australians want and frankly, they deserve and we deserve stronger protection of Indigenous culture and heritage.” Prof Samuel said the EPBC Act should have an Indigenous knowledge and engagement committee to provide the federal environment minister with advice. He said there should be a standard for best practice for Indigenous engagement and a comprehensive review of national laws to protect Indigenous cultural heritage. “The EPBC Act has failed to fulfil its objectives as they relate to Indigenous Australians,” the interim report says. “Indigenous Australians’ traditional knowledge and views are not fully valued in decision-making, and the Act does not meet the aspirations of traditional owners for managing their land.” Australia’s Indigenous heritage protections recently came under scrutiny after mining giant Rio Tinto destroyed a significant site in Western Australia that dated back 46,000 years. The Australian Conservation Foundation’s Dave Sweeney said there were many examples of when the national laws failed Indigenous communities. Although Tjiwarl native title holders had taken Western Australia to court to prevent a uranium project, the federal government gave expedited approval in 2019. “Right now, the federal government is seeking to build a national radioactive waste store and dump site near Kimba in regional SA,” Mr Sweeney told AAP. “The area’s traditional owners, the Barngarla people, were not included in a local council’s regional ballot to test the public mood on this and remain strongly opposed to the waste plan.” Federal Environment Minister Sussan Ley and Indigenous Australians Minister Ken Wyatt will hold a meeting with their state counterparts in a bid to improve protections. WA-based Labor MP Josh Wilson said the ministers must be clear about a timetable for reform so change can happen. “Labor will consider all and any reasonable changes to legislation that will deliver proper protection of First Nations heritage, stronger consultation with First Nations people, and greater clarity for all stakeholders,” he said. |
|
Federal environment law review calls for independent cop, but Morrison Government rules it out
Federal environment law review calls for independent cop, but Morrison Government rules it out, ABC News, By national science, technology and environment reporter Michael Slezak 21 July 20,
Key points:
The 124-page interim report comes 20 years after the laws were first implemented by the Howard government
The report’s author has called for a “strong, independent cop” on the environment beat
The Federal Government has accepted some recommendations, but rejected the report’s call for an independent regulatorThe independent review into the 20-year-old Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act (EPBC), released this morning, also flagged legally enforceable “national standards” to stop the decline of Australia’s natural environment.
“The foundation of the report was that there is too much focus on process and not enough focus on outcomes and that should be changed entirely,” Graeme Samuel, the review’s independent author, said.
He concluded that Australia’s environment was getting worse under the laws designed to protect it.
“Australia’s natural environment and iconic places are in an overall state of decline and are under increasing threat,” he said.
Environment Minister Sussan Ley immediately moved to rule out an “independent cop”, which was policy taken to the last federal election by the Opposition.
But the Federal Government accepted the recommendation for national standards, which she said would form the basis of agreements with states, allowing federal approvals to be devolved to the states.
If brought into law it would establish a “one-stop shop” or “single-touch approvals”.
The devolving of federal approval powers to states has long been the aim of the Federal Government.
The report calls for the Government to maintain the power to step in on any decisions it deems important, or when a failure of state processes has been identified.
The 124-page interim report comes 20 years after the laws were first implemented by the Howard government……….
Independent cop call
In his review, Professor Samuel, the former chair of the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, said a “strong, independent cop on the beat is required”.
“An independent compliance and enforcement regulator, that is not subject to actual or implied political direction from the Government Minister, should be established,” he said.
“The regulator should be responsible for monitoring compliance, enforcement and assurance. It should be properly resourced and have available to it a full toolkit of powers.”
The call echoes Labor Party policy from the last election, which called for a federal environmental protection agency — a move backed by the Australian Conservation Foundation (ACF).
ACF chief executive, Kelly O’Shanassy, said at the moment protecting nature was “optional”.
Regardless, Ms Ley moved quickly to rule out any new regulator……….
Funding cuts and approval delays
The review began in November 2019 but its findings were delayed by the bushfires and then the coronavirus crisis.
While the report was being prepared, the Auditor General released a report finding 80 per cent of approvals under the laws were non-compliant or contained errors.
Federal Labor analysed those findings and concluded that since the Coalition came to power, there had been a 510 per cent blowout in the number of environmental approvals delayed beyond time frames indicated in the laws.
The delays came as the government cut funding to the environment department, which Labor said was now 40 per cent lower than it was before the Coalition came to power……. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-07-20/epbc-act-environmental-review-report-recommends-independent-cop/12392594
Nuclear status quo in federal environmental law review
Mineral Policy Institute and Friends of the Earth Australia, 20 July 2020
National and state environment groups have given a cautious welcome to the continuation of long-standing protections against nuclear risks in the current statutory review of the Environmental Protection Biodiversity Conservation Act – Australia’s federal environmental laws. The interim report released today has stated that the Commonwealth should maintain the capacity to intervene in uranium mining and made no recommendation to change existing prohibitions on nuclear activities, including domestic nuclear power.
Civil society groups made a joint submission to the EPBC review calling for the retention of the long standing ban on nuclear power and continuing federal oversight of uranium mining. The EPBC review committee’s interim report has flagged an intention to continue both protections despite lobbying from the Mineral Council of Australia to weaken these.
However, environment groups are concerned about a possible weakening of uranium mining regulations flagged in the interim report. Associate Professor Gavin Mudd, Chair of the Mineral Policy Institute, said: “The interim report proposes the further devolution of uranium mining regulation to states and territories, coupled to the establishment of ‘National Environmental Standards’. An obvious risk is that the standards will be weak, enforcement will be deficient as is already the case, and devolution will weaken the already inadequate oversight of uranium mining.”
“Uranium mining is different to other types of mining. Australia’s uranium mining sector has been dominated by license breaches, accidents, spills and a persistent failure to rehabilitate as promised. The last thing we need is a weakening of regulations and oversight. Apart from SA and NT every state and territory have a ban or prohibition on uranium mining. It is unsafe and unpopular and needs greater scrutiny, not less,” Assoc. Prof. Mudd said.
The Review’s interim report makes no recommendation to repeal the long-standing prohibition on domestic nuclear power. “Nuclear power is expensive, dangerous and unpopular,” said Dr Jim Green, national nuclear campaigner with Friends of the Earth Australia. “The prohibition in the EPBC Act reflects this. Nuclear is thirsty, produces high level nuclear waste for which there are no safe storage options and produces materials that can be diverted into nuclear weapons. It is a profound security and safety risk. And nuclear power is absurdly expensive.”
“Recent comments from the current Environment Minister and Opposition Leader show a clear bipartisan rejection of nuclear power. There is broad opposition among civil society as shown through a joint statement by over 60 organisations representing millions of Australians. Given the lack of social license for nuclear power in Australia we welcome the continuation of this prudent prohibition,” Dr Green said.
Following the Australian uranium-fuelled Fukushima nuclear disaster the UN Secretary General called for all uranium producing countries to conduct a cost-benefit analysis of the industry. Groups have called on the Morrison government to now hold an independent review of the uranium sector.
Cory Bernardi resuscitated – renewed zeal for nuclear and “Advance Australia”
Failed extreme right-wing politician Cory Bernardi seemed to have disappeared from the news. His zeal for the nuclear industry did not go down well with the Australian public.
But no, Cory is now resuscitated in the media – well, not exactly the reliable and respected news media. But he has found his natural habitat – where else but at right-wing paradise – Sky News?
And where has Cory found the political embrace that he craves? in the Advance Australia lobby group – perfect for Cory – climate denialism, pro nuclear fanaticism, and ever so coy about where they get their funding.
So-here’s Cory’s Sky News spiel: Nuclear is the ‘gold standard of power’ ticking all the boxes – “Nuclear energy solves the climate wars unravelling around the world” [Ed. note hang on, I thought that Advance Australia didn’t believe that climate change is real] “You want reliable and cheap, affordable energy? Nuclear ticks that box too,”
Advance Australia Director Liz Storer told Sky News: “The sooner we get nuclear off the ground the better,” she said. “It’s the gold standard of power.”
“Advance Australia” – a group of older rich white men, aiming to get richer.
What is Advance Australia, the new conservative lobby group taking on Get Up! 7.30, By Ashlynne McGhee, ABC News 21 November 2018 Australia has a new conservative lobby group that wants to knock on your door, get in your ear and ultimately swing your vote.
Advance Australia’s named with a nod to our anthem and the hope it can rival the powerful left-wing lobby Get Up!
It has some prominent backers and a bold mission — but can it succeed? The group’s financially and ideologically backed by a group of prominent business leaders including storage king Sam Kennard, businessman and former ABC chairman Maurice Newman and the Australian Jewish Association’s Dr David Adler.
Its national director is Gerard Benedet, who was the chief of staff to former Queensland LNP Treasurer Tim Nicholls in a previous life. “We’re not aligned to any political party,” he told 7.30.
“We’re an independent movement of mainstream Australians, who are determined to protect, advance and defend mainstream values and freedoms.”
Get Up! National Director Paul Oosting says that’s rubbish.
“Advance Australia is a group of rich white men on a campaign to make themselves richer,” he said.
“They want to work on issues that are in their own self-interest, that are the vested interests of the corporate lobby they represent.”………..
Who’s donating and who’s joining? It’s a little unclear. Membership is free, so money isn’t necessarily flowing from new recruits…….. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-11-21/what-is-advance-australia/10520122
“Advance Australia” -the extreme right wing lobby group, says that climate change is a hoax
From Wikipedia 20 July 20 The national director of Advance Australia was Gerard Benedet, a former Liberal Party staffer who led the organisation during the 2019 Australian federal election.[3] Benedet stood down in September 2019, and was replaced by Liz Storer, former City of Gosnells councillor,[4][5] and advisor to Liberal senator Zed Seselja.[6]
High-profile backers include businessmen such as Maurice Newman, Kennards Self Storage managing director Sam Kennard, and Australian Jewish Association president David Adler.[2][3] Other members of the advisory council include security specialist Sean Jacobs and journalist Kerry Wakefield.[7] Queensland businessman James Power is also said to have been involved.[8]….
Benedet says the membership is 60 per cent male and has an average age of about 50.[1]
Advance Australia has been accused of astroturfing and being little more than a front for the Liberal Party, much as GetUp has been accused of being a front for the Australian Labor Party.[11] Advance Australia’s independence has yet to be tested, whereas GetUp has been cleared of ties to the Labor Party on three occasions by the Australian Electoral Commission.[12].
The group believes that anthropogenic climate change is a “hoax”[6], with current national director Liz Storer describing of the teaching of the predominant scientific view as “the other side of the story being shoved down their throats. It’s already happening. The left have infiltrated our education systems. Any aware parent knows that their child is being taught the left’s ideology. ”
Doubts on the independence of the reiew of Australia’s national environmental laws
Frustration grows over delayed release of review into Australia’s environmental laws
‘Questions naturally arise’ about review’s independence, environmental group says, Guardian, Lisa Cox 17 Jul 20, Environment groups are increasingly anxious and frustrated as they wait for the release of an interim report from a review of Australia’s national environmental laws.
The review’s chair, the former competition watchdog head Graeme Samuel, handed his report to the environment minister, Sussan Ley, almost three weeks ago.
It had been due for release shortly after that but the government pushed back its publication, which is now expected sometime next week.
“When the review was announced, Minister Ley was very clear that this was meant to be an independent report. But when the report is delayed by government, questions naturally arise about how independent that process is,” said Suzanne Milthorpe, the national environmental law campaign manager at the Wilderness Society.
“If they are serious about this, they should release it so that all Australians can see and engage with the findings of this report.”
The review of Australia’s Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act is a once-in-a-decade statutory requirement. It has the potential to shape policy for the next 10 years in an area that is highly politicised.
The interim report and its recommendations will inform the next period of public consultation before Samuel delivers a final report in October.
In submissions to the review, environmental and industry groups have put forward proposals that involve the development of national environmental standards.
They agree Australia’s environment is in decline, but they hold different views on what a set of national standards might look like.
Industry continues to advocate for reductions in environmental regulation, while conservationists have called for stronger protection and an independent national environmental authority.
Just this week, Australia’s oil and gas lobby, APPEA, called for regulatory reform, and in particular the cutting of so-called environmental “green tape”, to support economic recovery from the coronavirus pandemic. …..
James Trezise of the Australian Conservation Foundation said a recent national audit office report that examined the assessment and approval of projects under the act had identified serious failures in governance.
That included findings that the government had been ineffective in managing risks to the environment and had failed to ensure developers were meeting the environmental conditions of their project approvals.
Trezise said reforms were needed to ensure Australia’s laws were better focused on delivering outcomes for the environment and that one way of achieving that was “through setting clear national standards” for environmental protection…….
James Trezise of the Australian Conservation Foundation said a recent national audit office report that examined the assessment and approval of projects under the act had identified serious failures in governance.
That included findings that the government had been ineffective in managing risks to the environment and had failed to ensure developers were meeting the environmental conditions of their project approvals.
Trezise said reforms were needed to ensure Australia’s laws were better focused on delivering outcomes for the environment and that one way of achieving that was “through setting clear national standards” for environmental protection……… https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jul/17/frustration-grows-over-delayed-release-of-review-into-australias-environmental-laws
Australia’s Liberal Coalition climate deniers are at it again
COALITION DENIERS AT IT AGAIN, MARK BUTLER. July 15, 2020
Coalition MP Craig Kelly has mounted an extraordinary attack on the Bureau of Meteorology in a Facebook post shared more than one thousand times in 36 hours.
Coalition MP George Christensen was among those who shared the post, saying: “Craig Kelly is in detective mode. Crooks within data-altering government agencies should be worried. Very worried.”
Does the Environment Minister Sussan Ley agree with these attacks on the Bureau of Meteorology? Does the Assistant Minister, Trevor Evans?
What about Mr Kelly and Mr Christensen’s backbench colleagues like Ross Vasta, Tim Wilson, Dave Sharma, Fiona Martin or Katie Allen?
If they don’t agree, what are they doing about the fact that their colleagues are using social media to spread disinformation in an attempt to discredit a government agency and undermine action on climate change?
This is beyond a joke. The Government needs to take responsibility for the actions of its own backbench.
Links to Mr Kelly and Mr Christensen’s posts:
https://www.facebook.com/CraigKellyMP/photos/a.251794581681850/1553197208208241/
https://www.facebook.com/CraigKellyMP/photos/a.251794581681850/1555461397981822/
https://www.facebook.com/gchristensenmp/posts/2988498467871728?__tn__=-R
Kimba “interim” nuclear waste site – bad news, uncannily like the misguided New Mexico waste plan
KIMBA GOVERNMENT PROPOSALS, by Peter Remta, 11 July 20 Is not the newspaper article below describing practically the same situation as with the Kimba proposals?
Should not the Australian government learn from this and the other unsatisfactory experiences overseas of which France is a main one despite being used as a successful example by the government for Kimba of community consent.
The author of this article and the former chair of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission of the USA (who incidentally has been to Kimba) would both be prepared to give evidence and their opinions to the Senate committee inquiry by video link.
However this article shows the effects of inept and incomplete planning as is the case with Kimba.
New Mexico nuclear facility is bad news, Las Vegas Sun, By Judy Treichel Monday, July 6, 2020, It may seem like good news in Nevada that an effort is underway in New Mexico to build a private storage facility for nuclear waste there.
But don’t be mistaken: This facility wouldn’t be an alternative to the disastrous Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository. In fact, its existence depends on Yucca Mountain becoming an operating repository. That’s unacceptable, because the Nevada facility poses far too many risks for our state.
The license application for the New Mexico facility calls for it to operate over 40 years, after which the waste stored in it would go to Yucca Mountain….. today those Yucca Mountain deliberations are on an indefinite hold.
Now comes the New Mexico license application to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which in the opinion of the Nevada Nuclear Waste Task Force the commission should not have accepted with the assumption that Yucca Mountain would be an operating repository.
During all of the time that Nevada has been fighting the Yucca Mountain proposal, we were repeatedly assured that we could place our trust in the commission because before any license was granted for construction or operation, a thorough and unbiased process would fully play out. We were told there was no reason for questioning the fairness of the commission’s licensing process…….
Any siting of a facility that creates risk for the community should require informed consent, and the people of New Mexico do not consent.
What we see happening with this so-called interim site is that it does not solve the nuclear waste problem. In fact it increases the risks by putting the waste on the roads and rails, and requiring it to be loaded and unloaded multiple times and transported more than once. Additionally, the only way a site can be considered “interim” is to know that the waste will leave, and the assumption here is that it will leave New Mexico and come to Nevada.
The incentive for the company proposing to build the facility is purely financial — specifically, it’s to gain access to the $42 billion in the federal nuclear waste fund. An interim site does not increase or improve public safety, but rather does just the opposite. It creates one more nuclear waste site and provides more room at reactor sites for more waste. And it moves the waste closer to Nevada.
A national high-level nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain is an overwhelmingly unsafe idea. Nevada residents, elected officials and people across the country living near transport routes know it. For 20 years, the Department of Energy studied the site and discovered — or were forced to admit — that there were conditions present that, according to their own guidelines, disqualified the site.
If the licensing process ever restarts, how could we trust the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to fairly judge the science when it has previously assumed a licensed and operating repository at Yucca Mountain? Congress needs to reverse the action it took naming Yucca Mountain as the only site to be considered for a national repository, and take a fresh and fair look at nuclear waste disposal.
Initiatives like the interim storage site in New Mexico are simply misguided and misleading diversions.
Judy Treichel is executive director of the Nevada Nuclear Waste Task Force
In contradiction to Angus Taylor, Australia’s Minister On Behalf of Polluting Industries, the States are leading on clean energy
How Australia’s state energy ministers are turning the tables on Angus Taylor, Guardian Simon Holmes à Court The state energy ministers still need to deliver on their promises, but imagine if any of them held the federal portfolio @simonahac, Sat 11 Jul 202 Sometimes it just takes a bit of leadership.Former prime minister Malcolm Turnbull likes to say that we must choose “engineering and economics” over “idiocy and ideology”. The New South Wales energy minister, Matt Kean, has been making the right choices.
In December 2018 I singled out NSW for its reckless lack of energy policy. The state, reliant on an ageing coal fleet for 80% of its power, had been shunned by energy investors……..
NSW is blessed with high-quality wind and solar resources, but lacks transmission lines between the best wind and solar areas and the state’s major population and industrial centres. In 2018, only one-in-20 proposed renewable energy projects could be accommodated into the weak grids in the west of the state, and developers were forced to turn their attention to the other states.
In a landmark speech late last year, Kean, the newly minted energy minister, made it clear his government would respond to the climate science and embrace the opportunities presented by decarbonising the economy.
“To those vested interests and ideologues who want to stand in the way of this transition, I say enjoy your Kodak moment,” he said.
Undeterred by attacks from the Murdoch media and even the prime minister, Scott Morrison, over the following months, Kean set about turning the tables in NSW……….
What’s stunning is how much ambition has shifted, and how it’s being driven by the states. Just two years ago the modelling for Josh Frydenberg’s failed national energy guarantee predicted that NSW wouldn’t build a single wind or solar farm from 2021 to 2030. Now Kean has a plan to build as much large-scale renewable energy this decade in NSW as all of Australia built over the past 20 years. …….
The Australian Energy Market Operator and CSIRO have determined that the cheapest way to “firm” the huge amounts of renewable energy is a relatively modest mix of better interconnections with neighbouring states, batteries and pumped hydroelectricity – Snowy 2.0 project and multiple smaller projects. On economic grounds alone, fossil gas is unlikely to play an increased role.
The Rezs will also open up opportunities for energy intensive industry. Flexible demand, such as hydrogen production, can help balance the grid. Instead of fracking the Pilliga forest to produce fertiliser with a huge carbon footprint, business could build a zero-carbon factory in the New England region, making fertiliser from renewable energy.
Angus Taylor, the federal minister for energy and emissions reductions, is famously no fan of renewable energy or of setting meaningful emissions reduction targets. On electricity, the state energy ministers – right across the political spectrum – are charging ahead without him, which is perhaps as it should be, given that electricity is the states’ responsibility…….
Every state and territory has now formally signed on to a net-zero emissions target by no later than 2050, a target backed by business, unions and the opposition – yet the federal government and its donors stand in the way.
Australia has three Liberal state energy ministers. South Australia’s Dan van Holst Pellekaan wants to see his state hit 100% renewables by 2030. His Tasmanian counterpart, Guy Barnett, is gunning for 200% renewables and Kean has outlined a plan for NSW to be an energy superpower.
Sure, these energy ministers still need to deliver on their promises, but imagine if any one of them held the federal portfolio. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jul/11/how-australias-state-energy-ministers-are-turning-the-tables-on-angus-taylor?utm_term=Autofeed&CMP=soc_568&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1594424036
Keep Australia’s nuclear prohibition laws: it appears that nuclear is no part of climate action, not necessary
The most important group of nuclear power advocates who have consistently promoted concerns about climate change as the main reason for their advocacy have been the self-described ‘eco-modernists’. The main organizational focus of ecomodernism is the
Breakthrough Institute, established by Michael Shellenberger and Ted Nordhaus in 2003.Australia now the biggest exporter of global heating- the Saudi Arabia of coal and gas
 Passing the pollution: Australia becomes world’s biggest exporter of fossil fuels, https://thenewdaily.com.au/news/2020/07/09/australia-export-fossil-fuels/ Cait Kelly, Australia is now the biggest exporter of climate change, leading the world in selling fossil fuels, a new report reveals.Emissions from nations which bought our gas, coal and oil increased by 4.4 per cent between 2018 and 2019, with Australia now the world’s biggest fossil fuel producing country, the report from UNSW says.
Our exported emissions are now greater than the domestic pollution of Germany, Canada, Turkey and the UK. “Not only is Australia a laggard in meeting its UN Paris emission reduction targets, but it is also now the world’s largest exporter of coal and gas,” the authors wrote. “In fact, the emissions from Australia’s exported fossil fuels are now greater than Germany’s domestic emissions.” Australia has been on track to become the world’s bigger carbon dioxide polluter for a while, with a report from The Australian Conservation Foundation last year warning we would hit the milestone soon. Russia and Saudi Arabia were both above Australia as recently as August last year. Using new data from the Office of the Chief Economist, emissions from exported fossil fuels were 1.2 times greater than global aviation emissions in 2018 and 1.4 times greater than all the CO2 emissions produced by the summer bushfires in 2019. When Australian fossil fuels are burned overseas, the amount of carbon dioxide they produce is higher than the exported emissions of the world’s biggest oil and gas-producing nations, like Iraq and Kuwait. “Despite Federal Government claims that our national emissions have only a minimal impact on the global climate, Australia is, in fact, a major contributor to global climate change.” “The massive emissions that result from our fossil fuel exports are not counted in Australia’s national carbon budget under our UN climate obligations, nor do we take responsibility for the impact these emissions are having globally.” Australia is the world’s biggest exporter of coal and our exported emissions should be counted towards our overall emissions footprint, said lead researcher and professor of political philosophy Jeremy Moss. “We’re the Saudi Arabia of coal and gas. That’s not a good situation to be in,” he told The New Daily. “People say we’re not responsible for exports, the government spends a billion dollar to recycle our waste which otherwise would have gone to other countries. These emissions are also our problem. “Responsibility doesn’t stop at the border. We have the same view about plastic waste, uranium and live sheep exports.” The report calls for fossil fuel non-proliferation treaty, removal of the $47 billion worth of subsidies for the fossil fuel industry and phasing out production constant with climate goals,” Professor Moss said. “At least two-thirds of the known reserves of fossil fuels must be left in the ground if climate targets are to be met (IEA, 2012). “Production of fossil fuels must, therefore, be phased out rapidly. Countries such as Australia should not get a free pass to produce and export as much fossil fuels as they are able to.” The report follows the announcement that the COVID-19 economic recovery committee has made recommendations that the government underwrite a massive gas industry expansion. Australia’s Energy Minister, Angus Taylor, is proposing a gas led recovery out of the pandemic-induced recession. But a report from the Australia Institute revealed last week that fossil fuel was the worst-performing sector in the ASX 300 over the last decade. “The poor performance of fossil fuel companies is probably surprising to most Australians, who are routinely told by industry and political leaders that coal is the “bedrock” of Australia’s prosperity, or that gas will “fire” the recovery from COVID19,” it read. |
|
Independent advice essential for Kimba community: they have received only pro nuclear dump propaganda
Having read the Hansard transcript of Tuesday’s Senate committee hearing it becomes even more imperative that the community at Kimba opposing the facility and others who are not completely convinced must get their own independent advice and assessment on the government’s proposals
The most concerning of the evidence was that on behalf of ARPANSA which contrary to expectations suggested that any community involvement or engagement in the licensing process would be rather perfunctory
The way I understand that evidence by Dr Larsson is that the extent of the consultations with the community will really be what and how the community decides – this would suggest that they will be in a far stronger position if they have proper technical information and knowledge to argue against the government’s proposals in the course of the consultations
In view of this evidence the chairman and members of the inquiry committee should be formally requested to provide the necessary funding for the independent advice and assessment and the right to bring the results into the evidence for the inquiry
The community at Kimba opposing the facility, and others must stress the disadvantage and unfairness in their being deprived of that advice and assessment, and that is it is also equitable for the Government to pay for the independent assessment having regard to the money already given to the community to bolster approval for the government’s choice of the facility location
After all how can ARPANSA expect them to be fully and properly involved in the community consultation process if they do not have the necessary information?
AustralianGovtWatcher comments on Senate Committee enquiry hearing on Tuesday 30 June 2020
In general both the committee members and the witnesses appeared to be ill prepared and lacked knowledge of some of the pertinent issues involved
Several important factors were neither raised by questions nor otherwise dealt with by the witnesses – these included:
- details of expenditure of the whole exercise particularly the cost of the reports by AECOM
- more specific description of how the Kimba proposals and present arrangements for storage of nuclear waste comply with international standards and best practice
- no information on the radionuclides inventories and mobility
- information on examination of techniques and methods for permanent disposal of intermediate level waste – merely mentioned directional drilling which no doubt refers to the borehole technology
- no specific mention of geological burial requirements and applicable codes
- complete silence on immediate availability of the highly suitable Leonora site of the Azark Project
- no questions regarding the previous nominations
- no questioning of the ballot results yet seemed to agree with the Department’s proposition that the Barngarla peoples’ own ballot was of not much help since so many had not voted
Senator Sarah Hanson-Young pursued a couple of worthwhile points regarding consultations with the Barngarla and their lack of informed consent and the issue of double handling of the intermediate level waste by initial storage at Kimba followed by permanent disposal at some other location
The other member who pursued a number of issues with some success was Senator Jenny McAllister but again she appeared to lack the required knowledge to be really effective
However she was a butt to Senator Chris Carr who is obviously very much in favour of the Kimba proposal particularly with his references to his discussions with Dr Adi Paterson from ANSTO
Senator Rex Patrick asked some good questions but regrettably this was obviously slanted towards his present campaign to get the waste disposed of at Woomera
Perhaps the most badly prepared witness was Ms Sam Chard from the Department who simply could not answer some fairly basic questions and kept asking for them to be put on notice for subsequent provision of the necessary information – she was actually castigated by Senator McAllister
Asking for requests to be put on notice is invariably good tactics to avoid having to answer immediately an uncomfortable question and I suspect there is more use of this than necessary
However this can be reduced to some extent if the inquiry committee made greater use of its powers of production and discovery before and even during the hearings
The witness with whose answers I was disappointed – and I did see a bit of him on video – was Dr Carl-Magnus Larsson from ARPANSA who was very noncommittal and not extremely helpful by continuously claiming that ARPANSA would only become involved once it received the applications for the necessary licences for the Kimba facility
The very disappointing aspect of his evidence is that he would not provide any significant technical information and seemed too interested in shoring up the position of ANSTO
It is of course very difficult in these hearings since the members of the enquiring committee are mostly not trained in the art of forensic questioning as well as having insufficient knowledge to make the inquiry process very effective
It also seems that the research team for the enquiry did not delve sufficiently into various issues that should be investigated which only makes it more difficult for the committee considering the limited time given to each member for questions
From the submissions by the government and its agencies it is now quite clear that the community members opposing the Kimba facility must get proper independent assessment and advice to be able to be involved in the consultations with ARPANSA during the licensing process in a meaningful manner
They should ask the committee to ensure sufficient funds are available for that purpose as otherwise it will be practically impossible for the community members to deal with the technical and rather scientific aspects of the licensing applications particularly as Dr Larsson was not overly encouraging in his evidence about assisting them
The best self serving evidence was from AEMCO who simply relied on their report and very stated that quite a few of the issues raised by questions ere outside of its commission
Impressions of Senate hearings on nuclear waste dump Bill
We saw ANSTO, ARPANSA and the Department of Industry etc being grilled by Senators Rex Patrick, Sarah Hanson-Young and ALP Jenny McAllister.1 This month
Chernobyl: The Lost Tapes – A good documentary on Chernobyl on SBS available On Demand for the next 3 weeks– https://www.sbs.com.au/ondemand/tv-program/chernobyl-the-lost-tapes/235274195556
20 May – Webinar – The dangerous world of AUKUS, US, military occupation and suppression of dissent
National Webinar, 20th May, 2026, 6.30pm AEST. Confronting laws restricting/suppressing protest speech and action
Speakers: Former Sen. Rex Patrick, Lawyer Nick Hanna ,Arthur Rorris ,Jorgen Doyle, Sen David Shoebbridge,
Facilitator Kelley Tranter.
of the week – Australians for War Powers Reform (AWPR)
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity
Antinuclear 