Controversial legislation for Kimba nuclear waste dump is tabled in Federal parliament
Nuclear legislation on the table, Whyalla News, Louis Mayfield 14 Feb 20 The federal government’s goal of establishing a National Radioactive Waste Management Facility (NRWMF) at Napandee, Kimba is a step closer after key legislation was tabled in the Parliament on Thursday.
The controversial National Radioactive Waste Management Amendment (Site Specification, Community Fund and Other Measures) Bill 2020 will be subject to much scrutiny from the Senate crossbench and other stakeholders.
“It is wrong to say there is broad community support. Traditional Owners have rejected the proposal. Once again the Morrison Government and Minister Canavan haven’t listened,” she said.
“Whilst the decision by 62% of the community to back the facility being built must be respected, so too must the views of those who were under the impression that the facility would not go ahead without ‘broad community support’,” he said.
The bill will also allow the government to establish a $20 million Community Fund for Kimba, promising to support long-term infrastructure and development priorities for the town……. https://www.whyallanewsonline.com.au/story/6629280/nuclear-legislation-on-the-table/?fbclid=IwAR0Q46EnPyGMac0c6shR7o_dhPh5BQBhWwkN1FuCaq6zwJi_6lfc2qjS0SA
Whyalla is targeted for nuclear waste shipments and should have a right to refuse untenable plans.
Whyalla is targeted for nuclear waste shipments and should have a right to refuse untenable plans.
Napandee Nuclear Store site nomination also targets Whyalla Port: Nuclear Brief (Feb 2020) by David Noonan, Independent Environment Campaigner
Amidst rising controversy, a Federal Minister has nominated Napandee near Kimba on Eyre Peninsula as a Nuclear Store to take reactor fuel wastes and long-lived wastes from Lucas Heights.
The “Site Characterisation Technical Report: Napandee” (DIIS, July 2018, Proximity to ports p.150) named Whyalla Port to take shipments of nuclear fuel wastes, in the event Napandee is named as a Nuclear Store. Two shipments of reprocessed nuclear fuel wastes, in 130 tonne TN-81 casks, are intended within the first two years of operations of a Nuclear Waste Store at Napandee (p.152).
Some 100 x B-double 50 tonne loads of Intermediate Level Wastes (ILW) are also intended in the first four years of Nuclear Store operations at Napandee (p.152). The Report (p.157-158) states:
“It may be possible to have these containers shipped from Port Kembla to ports such as Whyalla”
However, the Federal government has conspicuously failed to consult the SA community on plans to impose multiple shipments of nuclear waste across SA, including potentially through Whyalla Port.
This flawed practice is in continued breach of advice of the Nuclear Safety Committee (NSC) to the nuclear regulator ARPANSA (Nov 2016) on the NRWMF, on transparency in decisions, stating:
“The ongoing requirement to clearly and effectively engage all stakeholders, including those along transport routes.” With the NSC stating that: “Such engagement is essential…
” Eyre Peninsula, Whyalla and transport route communities have so far been denied a say on these Federal nuclear waste plans and now face potential serious reputational risks and material impacts.”
The Australian Radioactive Waste Management Framework (DIIS, April 2018, p.4) reports total Intermediate Level Wastes at 1,770 m3 – with 95% (by volume) arising as Federal government wastes.
The Federal gov. plans to more than double Intermediate Level Wastes to produce a further 1,960 m3 over next 40 years, with 1,850 m3 (95%) of that arising from ANSTO Lucas Heights operations.
All these nuclear wastes are intended to go to Napandee for up to 100 years above ground storage.
Proposed indefinite above ground storage of nuclear fuel wastes at Napandee may compromise safety and security in SA and contravenes Nuclear Safety Committee advice. The NSC has stated dual handling in transport associated with interim storage “does not represent international best practice” and raises “implications for security”. These federal nuclear plans are also illegal in SA.
The previous SA State Liberal government prohibited the import, transport, storage and disposal of nuclear fuel wastes and reprocessed wastes under the Nuclear Waste Storage (Prohibition) Act 2000.
“The Objects of this Act are to protect the health, safety and welfare of the people of South Australia and to protect the environment in which they live by prohibiting the establishment of certain nuclear waste storage facilities in this State.”
ARPANSA states these nuclear wastes require isolation from the environment for 10 000 years.
Nuclear waste can pose serious Safety, Accident and Security Risks:
“In the event of a major nuclear accident, adverse impacts on the tourism, agriculture and property sectors could potentially be profound.”
SA Nuclear Royal Commission: Tentative Findings, Risks and Challenges, Impacts on other Sectors (Feb 2016, p.28)
Key questions on safety and security in nuclear fuel waste transport and storage remain unanswered (see D Noonan submission to Minister Canavan, p.11-12). These wastes must not be allowed into SA.
The UK Nuclear Free Local Authorities “Briefing: Nuclear security concerns – how secure is the UK civil nuclear sector?”
(NFLA, May 2016) highlights key security threats including the risks from potential malicious attack on a nuclear waste transport or on a nuclear waste storage site. NFLA (p.8) cites the views of nuclear engineer Dr John Large on safety as at the heart of its concerns:
“Movement of nuclear materials is inherently risky both in terms of severe accident and terrorist attack. Not all accident scenarios and accident severities can be foreseen; it is only possible to maintain a limited security cordon around the flask and its consignment; … terrorists are able to seek out and exploit vulnerabilities in the transport arrangements and localities on the route; and emergency planning is difficult to maintain over the entire route.”
NFLA Recommendations (p.15) call for real discussion on the aftermath of a nuclear security incident given the major emergency response issues that arise. That belated debate is yet to be heard in SA.
SA is arguable unprepared for the consequences of nuclear fuel waste accidents or security events. Hundreds of Police were required for security at a 2018 nuclear waste shipment out of Port Kembla.
Whyalla is targeted for nuclear waste shipments and should have a right to refuse untenable plans.
In “Nuclear port potential” (Whyalla News, 3 rd August 2018, p.1) the Mayor said Federal gov. plans to use Whyalla’s port for nuclear waste: “would require significant community consultation”, noting:
“In the past Whyalla has opposed any nuclear or radioactive shipping in this region”.
DIIS’s Napandee Site Characterisation Report refers to potential “occurrences of complete shutdown” (p.154) in Iron Triangle Cities during nuclear waste shipments. This is unacceptable.
These are fundamentally State issues and the SA public have not given consent to proposed nuclear waste transport and storage. Under the leadership of Premier Steven Marshall the SA State Liberal government has a responsibility to protect the public interest and to uphold the law in our State.
The Marshall gov. must protect all SA regional communities and reject a Nuclear Waste Store in SA. For further Information, see: https://nuclear.foe.org.au/waste
Barngarla Native Title Holders excluded from vote on Kimba nuclear waste dump
Kimba nuclear waste dump: PM and South Australia Premier Marshall must step in
“South Australians have greater ambitions for our state than to be someone else’s nuclear waste dump.”
|
Kazzi Jai Fight To Stop Nuclear Waste In The Flinders Ranges
Kimba nuclear waste dump: PM and SA Premier Marshall must step in – Dr Jim Green 01 Feb 2020
Federal resources minister Matt Canavan has today announced his intention to move ahead with plans for a national nuclear waste dump near Kimba on SA’s Eyre Peninsula. Dr. Jim Green, national nuclear campaigner with Friends of the Earth, said: “Mr. Canavan has decided to ignore the unanimous opposition of Barngarla Traditional Owners. That decision must not be allowed to stand.
Prime Minister Scott Morrison should intervene to reverse the decision.
“SA Premier Steven Marshall should make it clear that imposing a facility against the will of Traditional Owners is unacceptable and unconscionable and that the SA government will fight the dump proposal, just as the Rann government fought and eventually convinced the Howard government to back down.”
SA Labor argues that Traditional Owners should have a right of veto. Deputy Leader of the Opposition Susan Close said in Oct. 2019 that SA Labor is “utterly opposed to the process” leading to today’s decision. She described the process as “appalling”.
Shamefully, the federal government refused a request from Barngarla Traditional Owners, native title holders of the area, to be included in the community ballot held last year. The Barngarla Determination Aboriginal Corporation (BDAC) engaged an independent ballot agent to conduct a confidential postal ballot. Not a single Barngarla Traditional Owner voted in favour of the dump. BDAC wrote to Mr. Canavan calling on him to abandon the nuclear dump in light of their unanimous opposition, and stating that “it is BDAC’s responsibility to continue to give voice to the profound concerns Barngarla traditional owners have and to take whatever steps are necessary to oppose the NRWMF being located on Barngarla Country.”
Dr. Green said: “Mr. Canavan not only ignores the opposition of Traditional Owners, he also ignores local division in Kimba. The result of the government-initiated community ballot fell short of his own benchmark of 65% for ‘broad community support’ so Mr. Canavan shifted the goalposts. And he ignores the opposition of a majority of South Australians.”
A 2018 poll found that 55% agreed that SA should stop the federal government from building a national nuclear dump in outback SA while 35% disagreed; those who strongly agreed with stopping the dump outnumbered those who strongly disagreed by a factor of three (41:14). A 2016 Sunday Mail-commissioned poll found that support in SA for a national dump (39.8%) was well short of 50%. A 2015 Advertiser-commissioned poll found just 15.7% support for a nuclear waste dump in SA.
Dr. Green said: “The federal government’s claim that the nuclear waste dump will generate 45 jobs is a dishonest fabrication which is wildly inconsistent with job creation at comparable facilities overseas. At least when Prime Minister John Howard tried to impose a nuclear dump in SA, he had the honesty to acknowledge that no jobs would be generated.”
“The claim that the waste is low-level medical waste is a dishonest fabrication. Measured by radioactivity, well over 90% of the waste is long-lived intermediate-level waste that the federal government wants to store above ground at Kimba until such time as a deep underground disposal facility is established. No effort is being made to find a location for such a facility so this long-lived waste would remain stored above ground in SA ad infinitum.
The SA Nuclear Waste Facility (Prohibition) Act ‒ an initiative of the Olsen Liberal government ‒ should be used by the state government to halt this unacceptable proposal. The SA government should also initiate a parliamentary inquiry to thoroughly investigate the issues and the options.”
“Mr Canavan acknowledged last year that 93% of the radioactive waste is located at the Lucas Heights facility south of Sydney, operated by the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation. That is where Australia’s nuclear expertise is concentrated and that is where the waste should remain.
“South Australians fought long and hard to prevent the Howard government turning SA into the nation’s nuclear waste dump. We fought and won the campaign to stop the Flinders Ranges being used for a national dump. We fought and won the campaign to stop SA being turned into the world’s high-level nuclear waste dump. And now, we will fight until the Morrison government backs off.
“South Australians have greater ambitions for our state than to be someone else’s nuclear waste dump.”
|
|
|
The shambles of the Australian government’s Kimba nuclear waste dump plan
Craig Wilkins: This waste will be temporarily parked in above-ground sheds at Kimba https://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/opinion/craig-wilkins-this-waste-will-be-temporarily-parked-in-aboveground-sheds-at-kimba/news-story/064782c0e3da8ec896aafd01c8422775
A nuclear dump at Kimba will not just see low level radioactive medical waste introduced to the Outback, writes Craig Wilkins. It’s time to tackle the misinformation.
There is clearly a lot of misinformation about the proposed nuclear waste dump at Kimba.
Caleb Bond thinks it’s a mystery that anyone can oppose a low-level nuclear waste dump (“Opinion”, The Advertiser, 4/2/20). The real mystery is how Mr Bond can think it’s just a low-level waste facility.
It’s not.
In fact, there are two separate proposals located side by side. As Mr Bond says, one is for low-level, lower-risk waste. But the other is for long-lived, intermediate-level waste – a far more dangerous proposition.
The intermediate-level waste includes spent fuel reprocessing waste from nuclear reactors at the Lucas Heights site south of Sydney, which needs to be kept safe from humans for 10,000 years. To put it in context, that’s twice as old as the great pyramids in Egypt.
It’s the genuine health and environmental risks from this intermediate-level waste that people are concerned about.
Not just a few hospital gloves and gowns. In fact, the risk is so acute that some countries actually classify this waste as “high-level”.
International best practice is for intermediate and high-level waste to be permanently buried deep underground. But that’s not what is proposed for Kimba. Instead, this waste will be temporarily parked in above-ground sheds while the authorities then start working out the best site for permanent burial.
Surely it makes sense to decide on the final resting place first before shifting the waste.
Especially as there is no particular urgency to remove it from its current secure storage at Lucas Heights.
Alongside this lack of forward planning, the promises of jobs and money go up and down like a yoyo, and the consultation process has excluded many – including the Barngarla traditional owners who hold native title over the land.
Shamefully, the Federal Government refused a request from Barngarla traditional owners to be included in a community ballot held last year. And when the Barngarla conducted their own poll, not a single traditional owner voted in favour. Moreover, the proposal itself is illegal under South Australian law.
For these reasons, many people remain deeply concerned. As so many questions remain, it makes sense for the SA Parliament to conduct a full, open inquiry into the proposal to clear up exactly what is proposed. And how much benefit, if any, will flow to the Kimba community.
Until then, organisations such as mine will support the community as it seeks answers from a process that has so far failed them. And we will continue to support the Barngarla traditional owners, whose opposition has been ignored.
CRAIG WILKINS IS CONSERVATION SA CHIEF EXECUTIVE
Kimba nuclear waste deal makes the “sports rorts” look like petty cash
NEWS “NUCLEAR DIVISION” https://www.thesaturdaypaper.com.au/news/politics/2020/02/08/nuclear-waste-site-selected-sa/15810804009368
The government’s decision to build a nuclear waste facility in Kimba has divided the South Australian town, with detractors questioning the millions spent on building community support. By Royce Kurmelovs.
Last Friday night, Andrew Baldock was putting his kids to bed when his father called from overseas to say he had just spoken to the then federal Resources minister, who had good news.
After five years, Matt Canavan had chosen their 7500-hectare cereal and sheep property near Kimba, South Australia, as the site for a proposed nuclear waste storage facility.
Others might have been devastated; they were thrilled……..
The decision means 160 hectares of the family property, Napandee, will be carved out to build a facility to store low-level and intermediate nuclear waste from 100 sites around the country.
According to Baldock, doing so will save Kimba. The 37-year-old carpenter says the facility will bring steady work, a certain future and millions of dollars to the town of 700 people on South Australia’s Eyre Peninsula.
It will also see the government pay the Baldocks for their property, though neither the family nor the Coalition has disclosed the amount, other than to say the figure will be “four times the land value” but can also be negotiated. For his part, Andrew Baldock is quick to add that this is not about the money, but the spreading drought.
“… I see it as really important for Kimba to diversify its economy where we can make sure we’re not reliant on agriculture.”
The search for a nuclear waste storage facility in Australia began in 1998 with the Howard government, which sought to build one at Woomera, about 450 kilometres north of Adelaide. When that plan went nowhere, the government briefly flirted with putting a facility at Muckaty Station in the Northern Territory, until Indigenous opposition forced a backdown in 2014.
A year later, talk returned to South Australia. While the federal proposal gathered steam, the Labor state government had captured national attention with a plan to build a storage facility that would take in nuclear waste from across the world.
Although the state plan was soundly rejected, the federal proposal remained quietly viable when Kimba’s local Liberal MP, Rowan Ramsey, offered up his farming property as a possible site. Ramsey would be joined by former Liberal senator Grant Chapman, who offered his own land near Hawker, much to the dismay of locals.
Both would later be excluded due to the obvious conflict of interest. Yet while community opposition in Hawker led to the town eventually being removed as an option, the volunteering of properties by the Baldocks and others kept Kimba in contention.
But community support was lacking. To attract that support, French mayors were flown in from Champagne to talk about the nuclear storage facilities that operate there. Interested locals were given tours of the Lucas Heights research reactor in Sydney. Lectures on nuclear science were held.
“There’s no detail about how that [$55 million] has actually been spent. This makes sports rorts look like absolute petty cash.”
Supporters formed the view that Australia’s continued use of nuclear medicine, such as radiotherapy, meant a demand had to be filled. Opponents answered that suggesting people with cancer might not receive treatment without a nuclear waste facility in Kimba was emotional blackmail……..
More serious, however, was the issue of intermediate waste. While much of the focus had been on the “low-level medical” waste – which opponents say didn’t bother them – this other material is many times more potent.
When authorities said they would use Kimba to “temporarily” house higher-grade radioactive waste for several decades “until a more permanent solution can be found”, the plan’s detractors thought it sounded like the facility was the thin end of the wedge.
Once the waste was in Kimba, why not upsize?
Hate mail was sent; bitter arguments broke out at the pub or across the dinner table. Opponents say they were increasingly excluded from social engagements and official processes.
All this reached a new climax last Saturday morning, when Matt Canavan issued a press release about his decision……..
Two days later, Canavan resigned his cabinet position to back an ill-fated attempt by Barnaby Joyce to retake the Nationals leadership.
Kimba’s mayor, Dean Johnson, talks numbers. To date, about $55 million has been spent to find a site and build community support. It’ll be another 12 months before construction on the facility starts. There’s other legislation that needs to pass before then, as well as the risk of litigation.
More money has been promised. There is a $31 million Community Benefit Program, $8 million of which will be spent on skills, education and business training. Another $3 million will be used to fund an Indigenous heritage program. Finally, $20 million will be given to a community capital fund. The facility promises 45 full-time jobs, which Johnson insists will not be fly-in, fly-out.
The catch is that the waste dump must be built before the money flows.
“We don’t have the final figures yet, but all told it’s in the vicinity of half a billion dollars,” Johnson says. “That’s a lot of money. Yes, it is. There’s a lot of building. A lot of benefits going for Kimba, the Eyre Peninsula and South Australia. It’s a national facility so the benefits will go nationwide.”
Others, such as Barry Wakelin, aren’t so sure.
“There’s no detail about h“ow that [$55 million] has actually been spent,” he says. “This makes sports rorts look like absolute petty cash.”
Wakelin served as the electorate’s federal Liberal MP for almost 15 years, before he was succeeded by Rowan Ramsey in 2007. For him, coming out against the facility was a “matter of principle”. The decision has seen his party turn on him.
“I didn’t want anything to do with politics when I left,” he says. “I needed this like a hole in the head, but eventually your moral conscience kicks in.
“When we saw the reaction of our friends, we said: ‘What are we doing to these people?’ We have not seen anything like that in our community. The federal government has done everything they can to belt a small community.”
Wakelin is referring to the almost 40 per cent of people in town who voted against the project in late 2019.
Among them was James Shepherdson, 48, who was on his farm when the news broke on Saturday morning. To get reception on his mobile he had to drive to the top of a nearby hill. There he learnt of Canavan’s decision – two days before a planned rally against the proposal.
“I physically started to shake when I heard the news,” Shepherdson says. “Absolute betrayal. That’s the right words, I would say.
“They took a vote – they excluded a lot of people – and only got 61 per cent. This entire time they said they needed what they called ‘broad community support’ where Canavan said that was about 65 per cent.”
Sunday’s rally drew up to 300 people, standing against the facility. While Shepherdson is determined to fight, the shearer turned farmer says he is already thinking about leaving, although not because of the danger posed by radioactive material.
Instead, he says the divide and conquer strategy the government has run to secure community support means he simply doesn’t see a future in Kimba for himself or his two kids.
“Honestly, I don’t think people in favour of this are looking at anything past their lifetime of financial assistance. I call it bribe money,” Shepherdson says. “At the end of the day, money talks.”
This article was first published in the print edition of The Saturday Paper on Feb 8, 2020 as “Nuclear division”.
Bangarla legal case: voting manipulation brought about “Yes” vote for Kimba nuclear waste dump ballot
Kimba radioactive waste debate hits court as Barngarla community says its concerns have been ‘ignored’
An Aboriginal corporation will launch a fresh legal battle over the Federal Government’s decision to store radioactive waste near Kimba, saying traditional owners’ views were “ignored”. Michelle Etheridge, Regional Reporter, The Advertiser, 4 Feb 2020,
An Aboriginal corporation says it is likely to launch a new legal challenge over the Federal Government’s decision to use farming property Napandee, near Kimba, to store radioactive waste.
It comes as the Barngarla Determination Aboriginal Corporation is already set to return to the Federal Court on February 21.
The organisation, which represents native title holders, is appealing Justice Richard White’s decision in July to dismiss its claim against Kimba Council.
It had argued the council discriminated against native title holders when it decided to exclude those who did not live in the area from a community ballot to gauge support for the radioactive waste storage site.
The Barngarla community conducted its own postal ballot, with all of the 83 traditional landowners who responded rejecting the proposal. It followed the Kimba vote – conducted on the Government’s behalf – finding 62 per cent of respondents were in favour of the facility, which would come with a $31 million community funding package.
In a statement, the Barngarla corporation this week said it would “likely” launch new judicial review proceedings after the results of its ballot were “ignored”.
The Federal Government has maintained that a nuclear waste site must have “broad community support”.
“The only reason why there was a yes vote was because Barngarla were excluded, and this has then been used as the justification to allow the facility to be built, entirely ignoring Barngarla’s views,” the Barngarla statement said. “The Barngarla stand with most of the farming industry against this proposal. However, the more important issue now is the fact that voting manipulation has allowed for the decision to occur.”………https://www.adelaidenow.com.au/business/sa-business-journal/kimba-radioactive-waste-debate-hits-court-as-barngarla-community-says-its-concerns-have-been-ignored/news-story/255f1f0cbbc8ccc33aabae7dad03089a
ANSTO Senior Nuclear Officer Admits Admits ANSTO reclassifies High Level Wastes as Intermediate Level.
Note the wastes in question – vitrified – at the top of the list above
Kim Mavromatis No Nuclear Waste Dump Anywhere in South Australia 
shared a link. ANSTO Senior Nuclear Officer Admits Admits – France classifies waste from reprocessed Spent Nuclear Fuel as High Level Nuclear Waste – and when the waste gets shipped back to Aust it is reclassified as Intermediate.
A reminder to South Australian govt that nuclear waste dumping is illegal there
Our laws are clear, there are ten year imprisonment penalties and multi million dollar fines for offences relating to planning and promotion and establishment and operation of a nuclear waste dump in South Australia – these are very serious penalties, in accord with the gravity of the threat.
These laws have been breached by recent bribery and deception activities … and there are clear public statements of intention to breach these laws further in the near future, recently moving from conspiring to breach the importation prohibition, to specifying a precise place where an illegal dump is planned, on farm land in the middle of a large area of precious farm land.
Please act to fight this evil criminal activity.
As specified in the legislation, this is a matter of acting “to protect the health, safety and welfare of the people of South Australia and to protect the environment in which they live by prohibiting the establishment of certain nuclear waste storage facilities in this State.”
(Nuclear Waste Storage Facility (Prohibition) Act 2000 https://www.legislation.sa.gov.au/…/NUCLEAR%20WASTE… )
Best wishes
from
Brett Stokes
resident of Willaston 5118
Strong rally in Kimba, South Australia, against nuclear dump plan
SA community calls on government to scrap planned nuclear waste dump, SBS, 2 Feb 2020 Protesters are venting their anger at a nuclear waste dump proposed on South Australia’s Eyre Peninsula. Protesters are calling on the federal government to scrap a proposed nuclear waste dump on South Australia’s Eyre Peninsula at a rally on Sunday.
The farming property Napandee near the town of Kimba was announced as the site of the radioactive facility on Saturday.
But the No Radioactive Waste on Agricultural Land in Kimba or SA committee says the community consultation process was flawed.
“Those opposed to the facility have had no choice but to fight, at every opportunity, for our legitimate concerns to be heard,” president Peter Woolford said…..
Federal Resources Minister Matthew Canavan said a decision on the site would be announced soon. https://www.sbs.com.au/news/sa-community-calls-on-government-to-scrap-planned-nuclear-waste-dump
Australian govt’s dodgy process, with “jobs promises” for getting support for Kimba nuclear waste dump.
Megan Jo I Fight To Stop A Nuclear Waste Dump In South Australia 3 Feb 2020 I feel empathy for the people that voted yes. I think they truly believe that the promises of jobs, safety and prosperity are going to materialise. Sure, the government has promised 45 jobs….. but the current definition of ‘employed’ is 1 hour per week. Federal Government chooses Kimba farm Napandee on the Eyre Peninsula for nuclear dump
|
Federal Government chooses Kimba farm Napandee on the Eyre Peninsula for nuclear dump, ABC, 1 Feb 2020
The Federal Government has selected a farm on South Australia’s Eyre Peninsula as the site of a controversial nuclear waste dump. Key points:
Jeff Baldock’s Napandee property 20 kilometres west of Kimba will be used to permanently store low-level waste and temporarily store intermediate-level waste. The decision to use the 160-hectare area for what the Government calls a “disposal and storage facility” was made after four years of consultation. Nearly 62 per cent of people voted in favour of the site being used in November, while a site near Hawker in the Flinders Ranges was opposed by Aboriginal traditional owners and residents……. Dump to consolidate nuclear wasteLocal federal Liberal MP Rowan Ramsey said waste would come in from more than 100 sites around Australia, such as hospitals and universities, and the Lucas Heights nuclear reactor in Sydney. Processed medium-level nuclear fuel rods from Lucas Heights will be temporarily stored at Kimba while a permanent site is found for them, he said. Mr Ramsey, who tried to nominate his own property near Kimba for the dump but was barred as a federal MP, said there would be no fly-in, fly-out workers at the facility……. Aboriginal group opposed the voteThe Barngarla Determination Aboriginal Corporation launched legal action in 2018 against the District Council of Kimba, arguing it contravened the Racial Discrimination Act by excluding native title holders from a ballot due to be held that year. The Federal Court dismissed the claim last year because it said no contraventions of the Racial Discrimination Act had been established…….. The Howard government proposed a similar dump in South Australia in 1998 but withdrew its plans after losing a fight with the South Australian Labor government in the Federal Court. In 2007, a property called Mukaty Station in the Northern Territory was put forward to host the nuclear waste facility. The plan was abandoned in 2014, again because of legal action, this time by the area’s traditional owners. A group called No Radioactive Waste Facility for Kimba District held a rally against the decision in the town on Sunday.Friends of the Earth national nuclear campaigner Jim Green said the Federal Government promised the facility would not be approved unless it received at least 65 per cent of community support. “They’ve ignored the traditional owners, ignored South Australians. South Australia’s got legislation banning the imposition of nuclear waste dumps and that’s been ignored and it’s just disrespectful from start to finish,” he said. “South Australians have got greater ambitions for our state than to be someone else’s nuclear waste dump.”https://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2020-02-01/kimba-farm-eyre-peninsula-chosen-for-nuclear-dump/11920514 |
|
Matt Canavan. Minister for Nuclear Promotion, announces nuclear waste dump for Kimba, South Australia
This farce must be stopped. One white farmer offers his land for substantial gain. Aboriginal traditional group were denied a voice in this decision. Bribes given to the local white community looked attractive, but would nowhere near compensate for the loss of the area’s clean green image for agriculture. |
SA nuclear waste dump rally site chosen, Canberra Times, Kathryn Bermingham, 1 Feb 2020,
A farming property on South Australia’s Eyre Peninsula will become a nuclear waste dump, the federal government has announced, as opponents of the facility make a last-bid ditch to stop it. Federal Resources Minister Matt Canavan on Saturday said 160 hectares of the Napandee property in Kimba would host Australia’s radioactive waste, the vast majority of which comes from the production of nuclear medicine and is held across more than 100 sites. “Napandee was volunteered by the landowner, is suitable from a technical perspective, and has broad community support from those who live and work nearby,” he said in a statement.
The site near the town of Kimba will store low-level waste permanently and intermediate-level waste temporarily. It will employ about 45 people and the government will gift the community a $31 million package.
A property at Lyndhurst, also near Kimba, had been in the running but Mr Canavan said the Napandee proposal had more support. “The facility has broad community support in Kimba but I acknowledge there remains opposition, particularly amongst the Barngarla People and their representative group,” he said. “We will work with traditional owners to protect culture and heritage, and to maximise economic opportunities and outcomes for local Aboriginal communities near the future facility.” Before the announcement, Peter Woolford, president of the No Radioactive Waste on Agricultural Land in Kimba or SA committee, said locals and visitors will rally against the project on Sunday. Mr Woolford says five years of consultation has taken its toll on the town and his group is calling on the federal government to abandon both sites. “The process the federal government has undertaken to find a location for this facility has been a long and arduous one for the Kimba community,” he said. “Matthew Canavan’s process has been arbitrary, completely lacking in clarity and an extremely divisive process. “It is time for him to acknowledge that the prerequisite of ‘broad community support’ does not exist in Kimba, and allow the community to move forward.” The dump is opposed by environmental and indigenous groups – but a recent poll conducted around Kimba returned a 62 per cent vote in favour of the facility.
“We’re always looking for ways to attract new industry and try and boost our local community. “This is one of those projects that is not only supplying us with jobs but with an opportunity to attract new industry.” The Department of Industry, Innovation and Science said it had provided a significant amount of material to inform the site decision. “The department has put the community at the centre of this process, which involved more than four years of deep consultation and technical assessments,” it said. Guest speakers at Sunday’s rally will include local Labor MP Eddie Hughes, Conservation Council of SA chief Craig Wilkins and Kimba farmers James Shepherdson and Tom Harris. https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/6609008/sa-nuclear-waste-dump-rally-site-chosen/?cs=14231 |
|
Nuclear waste dump on farming land? NOT A DONE DEAL!
Barb Walker Fight To Stop A Nuclear Waste Dump In South Australia, 1 Feb 2020
THIS IS NOT A DONE DEAL!!! A site has been selected but the process is FAR FROM OVER!!!
The whole state of South Australia needs to get behind our KIMBA FARMERS and say, SOUTH AUSTRALIA IS TOO GOOD TO WASTE!!!
KIMBA IS PART OF A HUGE GRAIN GROWING FOOD BOWL – NOT A PLACE FOR A NUCLEAR WASTE DUMP!!!
Please come and join the bus-loads of people coming from all over the Eyre Peninsula and SA regions tomorrow: KIMBA RALLY tomorrow Sunday 2nd Feb, at 11am.
SAY NO TO A NUCLEAR WASTE DUMP IN KIMBA, SOUTH AUSTRALIA
Please contact South Australia’s Premier, Steven Marshall, and remind him that under our South Australian state legislation we have a PROHIBITION ACT AGAINST THE STORAGE OF NUCLEAR WASTE !!!
https://www.legislation.sa.gov.au/…/NUCLEAR%20WASTE…
LEGISLATION.SA.GOV.AU
South Australian Legislation https://www.facebook.com/groups/941313402573199
A questionable vagueness about the federal govt’s nuclear waste plan for Kimba
Mark Simpkin Fight To Stop A Nuclear Waste Dump In South Australia 1 Feb 2020, Once again smelly. Without fair balanced consultation with the community, disallowing all stockholders to participate in the ballot, there’s a questionable vagueness of what this dump will entail in terms of its storage of intermediate / high level waste.
When Rowan Ramsay (Kimba’s local federal member) was interview by Peter Goers on ABC Radio, no indication of the proximity of Rowan Ramsey’s own land to the dump site, little mention that land owners can NAME THEIR OWN PRICE for the land with no government oversight .
Finally our own state Liberal government allowed this to run its course with full knowledge of our existing laws that were established to prevent this and to top it all, this announcement at a time when the countries attention and grief is for the bushfires speaks volumes of the nature and character of these individuals. Poor form. https://www.facebook.com/groups/941313402573199/
1 This month
of the week – Disrupting War & Militarism in Oceania. Active solidarity. Radical practice.
Antinuclear 