Scrap nuclear: Key Liberal senator wants radioactive energy plan buried
David Crowe and Paul Sakkal, May 6, 2025
The Liberal Party is set for a pivotal clash over nuclear power after a key senator broke ranks to urge her colleagues to dump their plans for atomic energy, shaping the choice over the party’s leadership and direction.
The warning from Liberal senator Maria Kovacic marks the first public rejection of the nuclear plan from a member of the federal party room ahead of a broader debate about how to recover from the catastrophic defeat at the election.
The move comes as deputy Liberal leader Sussan Ley and shadow treasurer Angus Taylor contest a tight race to decide the leadership, with each side approaching immigration spokesman Dan Tehan to serve as deputy.
A damaging leak of internal polling, revealed by this masthead on Tuesday, has also fuelled discontent within the party, as MPs criticise the party’s pollster, Freshwater Strategy, for providing data that that gave Liberal leader Peter Dutton a false sense of confidence.
Kovacic said the election campaign showed that younger voters did not support the nuclear policy, based on her experience with Liberal candidates at polling stations, and that the party needed to listen to the verdict from voters last Saturday.
“We know how tough it is out there, and we didn’t offer Australian voters a legitimate alternative – and they sent that message very, very clearly on Saturday,” she said.
“And we can’t deny the fact that our nuclear plan was a part of that because it was one of the keystone policies.
“So it’s my view that the Liberal Party must immediately scrap the nuclear energy plan and back the private market’s investment in renewable energy.”
Liberal leader Peter Dutton embraced nuclear power in August 2022 after calls from Nationals leader David Littleproud to adopt the policy, but the plan set off a political firestorm over the $331 billion forecast to build and own the power stations.
While the Liberals expect to launch an election review to consider their defeat, Kovacic said the nuclear policy needed to be dumped immediately…………………………………….https://www.theage.com.au/politics/federal/tehan-firms-as-kingmaker-in-liberal-leadership-battle-as-polling-leak-sparks-recriminations-20250506-p5lwvy.html
Will the Coalition ditch its nuclear power policy?
The Liberals Against Nuclear group said in a media release that the “Liberal Party’s resounding defeat in Saturday’s federal election has confirmed what Liberals Against Nuclear has warned for months: the party’s nuclear energy policy was poison that contradicted core party principles.”
“As the party chooses its next leader, denouncing the nuclear energy policy and recommitting to traditional Liberal values must be the litmus test for any potential candidate.”
Jim Green, May 7, 2025, https://reneweconomy.com.au/will-the-coalition-ditch-its-nuclear-power-policy/?fbclid=IwY2xjawKIr5RleHRuA2FlbQIxMQBicmlkETEwN2xCZ0tDcWVCOTJLWjlyAR4dM_A5TV1mtAJXuKwDuXNCPTqBkEx6aqXLiVG_4RSf4CuBw0LCKjXx5M_THQ_aem_9Jf-rhE2w-fA5kbvxu0a4A
There is abundant evidence that the Coalition’s nuclear power policy was a significant drag on its vote on Saturday. On election night, energy minister Chris Bowen said:
“I mean this was a policy that was never going to survive contact with reality. It was a policy that was radical and risky … The Australian people have cast a very strong judgement on this. I mean we had polling a while ago showing 47 percent of voters in Dickson were less likely to vote for Peter Dutton because of the nuclear policy. Peter Dutton said it was a referendum on energy, which we were happy with, and the way the results are flowing, the result of that referendum on energy, nuclear vs renewables, is crystal clear.”
Even Clive Palmer was bagging nuclear power on election night, pointing to the troubled Flamanville reactor project in France that was 14 years overdue and five times over-budget.
Seven News political editor Mark Riley said: “The party that chose nuclear energy as its policy has exploded in a nuclear bomb set on them by voters tonight.”
An editorial in the Sydney Morning Herald summarised the Coalition’s nuclear problem:
“But outside the corridors of political power, his nuclear power policy played a role in the Coalition defeat on Saturday. Dutton was unable to justify or explain the cost adequately. His power stations were too expensive and bent future budgets into contortion. The CSIRO was unimpressed, and the private sector wanted nothing to do with them.
“Worse, they were a gift to Labor. It dawned on both sides early in the campaign that the nuclear policy had turned toxic. Labor jumped on it and Dutton’s battle bus steered well clear of the proposed nuclear sites.
“The fantasy of the timeline to bring the nuclear power stations online and the dubious costings only added to the voters’ perceptions that Dutton was talking hot air and that his promised policy would never happen.
“Now it’s back to square one for the Liberals on energy policy. It will not be easy. The shattered party must rebuild to recapture the heartland after it was crudely shoved towards conservative populism by Dutton and friends. Policy development will be a major cornerstone of that recovery. And energy is central to credible reform.”
Liberals Against Nuclear
The Liberals Against Nuclear group said in a media release that the “Liberal Party’s resounding defeat in Saturday’s federal election has confirmed what Liberals Against Nuclear has warned for months: the party’s nuclear energy policy was poison that contradicted core party principles.”
Spokesman Andrew Gregson said that Liberals Against Nuclear would continue its campaign against the nuclear policy:
“This result sees the Liberals facing a generational wipeout. Only significant and immediate change can chart of pathway back. Dropping the disastrous nuclear policy right now would demonstrate they are prepared to listen, learn and act.
“Since launching our campaign, we’ve been overwhelmed by messages from Liberals across Australia who share our dismay that such a consequential policy emerged without the robust debate that has always defined our party’s decision-making. Fellow Liberals have expressed frustration that a policy of this magnitude was imposed without the transparent consultation that true Liberal values demand.
“Saturday’s election results are simply the latest and most compelling evidence that the party faithful never signed up for nuclear and would not follow Mr Dutton down this path.
“As the party chooses its next leader, denouncing the nuclear energy policy and recommitting to traditional Liberal values must be the litmus test for any potential candidate.”
Divisions
There are deep divisions within the Coalition over energy policy, so much so that a split is under consideration. Canvassing a split, Queensland Senator Matt Canavan said he wants more coal power plants built and an end to the Coalition’s net zero emissions policy. He appears to be ambivalent about nuclear power: “I’m not against nuclear but … it would take some time. We need solutions now for the Australian people.”
Other Nationals MPs are promoting retention of the nuclear power policy, including leader David Littleproud, senate leader Bridget McKenzie, Colin Boyce and Michelle Landry.
The Nationals are congratulating themselves for outperforming the Liberal Party in the election. But the nuclear policy was initiated and strongly pushed by the Nationals and it was a drag on the Coalition vote across the country.
The ABC’s Jacob Greber said: “Littleproud has driven them onto the rocks, as a political movement, with the nuclear plan.” He further noted: “David Littleproud, the Nationals leader, vowed his nuclear power plan would not come at the expense of Liberals in the cities. He has a tough road ahead after this mess.”
Liberal MPs are beginning to publicly call for the Coalition to ditch its nuclear power policy. Senator Maria Kovacic said: “the Liberal Party must immediately scrap the nuclear energy plan and back the private market’s investment in renewable energy.”
Kovacic added:
“I think the result on Saturday is a pretty clear election review of what Australians think. We will not be electable for Gen Z and millennial voters who thought, you know, we were having them on with this policy. The idea that the party of free markets and small government would nationalise a major portion of the energy system is completely at odds with what we stand for.”
Liberal Senator James Paterson said he is not likely to fight to retain the nuclear policy, that nuclear power would be “logistically challenging” and “self-evidently more difficult” to implement in three years given the looming retirement of coal-fired power stations.
The SA Liberal Party announced two days after the federal election that it has dropped its policy of promoting nuclear power. The state party had promised a nuclear royal commission and created a position of ‘Shadow Minister for Nuclear Readiness’. But leader Vincent Tarzia said on Monday that nuclear power has been “comprehensively rejected and we know the thing is with the energy transition, in three years’ time we will be in another position again.”
If the Coalition persists with its nuclear power policy, it will have no support whatsoever from Liberal / LNP parties in the five states targeted for reactors.
Academic Adam Simpson wrote in The Conversation:
“After Saturday’s Coalition rout, the prospect of nuclear power in Australia should be dead and buried. But that’s not guaranteed. The National Party strongly backs nuclear power. With metropolitan Liberals sceptical of nuclear reduced to a rump, the Nationals and regional Liberals will gain influence within the Coalition. If conservative Nationals prevail, we may well see the nuclear policy survive the election post-mortem and be resurrected for the next election.”
Given the drag of the nuclear policy on the Coalition’s vote, it’s hard to see them going to the next election still promising to build seven taxpayer-funded nuclear power plants across five states. A compromise might be reached whereby a Coalition government would repeal federal laws banning nuclear power, and perhaps establish yet another inquiry, but without the commitment to go ahead with the seven proposed nuclear plants. Colin Boyce hinted at a compromise: “At the bare minimum, we need to remove the moratorium, at least.”
Dr. Jim Green is the national nuclear campaigner with Friends of the Earth Australia and a member of the EnergyScience Coalition.
The Nationals & Liberals are idealogically invested in nuclear weapons for Australia.
Claudio Pompili, 7 May 25
Yep…. until next time…
The Nationals & Lib They are still smarting from the fact of the UK having declined this option after the Maralinga atomic bomb tests. They deduced that having a civil nuclear power generation program was vital in acquiring a necessary social licence for a comprehensive nuclear program. They have zealously pursued this goal ever since, as evidenced by the innumerable and relentless inquiries & royal commissions. Slowly but surely they are manufacturing consent with the Australian public, as evidenced by the recent pre-election polls.
The pro-nukes in the Nats/Libs and their formidable enablers will never stop, and are encouraged by the bipartisan support for AUKUS. They believe that China/North Korea/Russia/Iran scare tactics coupled with immigration will eventually prevail and Australia will have its own nukes. The fight is not over. Until the next time…
Who defeated the Nazis in World War 2 ? Thank God for Hollywood!
On the 8th May 1945, Germany surrendered unconditionally to the Allies. On the 9th May 2025, Russia is holding a grand commemoration – a “Victory Day” for the 80th anniversary of this event.
How dare they? I know, from my extensive cinema history, that the Americans won World War 2.
Many exciting and entertaining movies have been made, over the decades, glorifying the courage and success of the good soldiers on the good side – several allied nations, notably the British. But my favourites were always from Hollywood. There were so many, and of course, I haven’t seen them all.
From early on, there were movies like The Story of G.I. Joe, Dive Bomber, So Proudly We Hail! and Sahara . And During World War II, Disney made films for every branch of the United States Armed Forces and government.
Hollywood downplayed the efforts and contributions of the other Allies . But some films grudgingly acknowledged the United Kingdom, who kept the hopeless fight alive until the USA joined in and saved the day. Non-European Allies are mostly never even mentioned, especially China, with its pivotal role in the war against Japan. The Soviet-German war on the Eastern Front if mentioned at all, is sometimes portrayed as a sideshow .
Some movies based on real events, such as the film U571 are about real persons who were not American, depicted them as Americans. U571 (2000) is about American submariners. ‘Red Tails’ (2012)is a great exaggeration about American airmen. In some movies, we learn that WWII only began only on December 7, 1941, when the United States entered the war. Some movies are such fun, even if fictional, for example the Americans killing Hitler in Inglourious Basterds.
Many movies are about the overall war effort , but focus on America’s involvement. Some of these films include Saving Private Ryan (1998) Flags of Our Fathers (2006): Band of Brothers (2001). Films on the D Day landings give the impression that the American landing on Omaha Beach was the decisive turning point that led to Allied victory in Europe.
Now, I know that I’m pretty right, in claiming that the Americans won World war 2. In our democratic culture we accept the opinions of the many. The more common view is now that the Americans were the primary reason for the Nazi defeat, with 40-52% in America and Europe saying so. (But Britons think it was the UK).
In 1945, 57% of French citizens believed Moscow “contributed most to the defeat of Germany in 1945” – just 20% named the US, and 12% Britain. By 2015, less than a quarter of respondents recognised the Soviet role, with 54% believing the US to be Nazism’s ultimate vanquisher. Today only 17-28% of Europeans and Americans suggest that the USSR did the bulk of the work in bringing down Hitler.
If you go to Encyclopedia Britannica, or Wikipedia, or many history sites, you are told some extraordinary facts and figures about the role of the Soviet Union in World War 2, and they attribute the defeat of Nazi Germany as being mainly achieved by the Russians, with substantial input from Britain and the USA.
For example – “The Eastern Front was decisive in determining the outcome in the European theatre of operations in World War II, eventually serving as the main reason for the defeat of Nazi Germany The decisive battles were Stalingrad, Kursk, and the Battle of Berlin.”
You find this sort of information – ” The Soviet Union lost at least 26 million in World War II, Considerably more than any other country. Russian casualties were 60 times the number of American casualties…. .. More Russian died at Stalingrad than Americans and Britons died in the whole war.”
D Day 6 June 1944, was a big day in bringing the war towards the end. Approximately 156,000 Allied troops landed in Normandy, France, of which nearly half were from the USA. Additionally, smaller contingents of troops from other allied countries were also involved. So at least the various historical records agree that the USA was strongly involved in the eventual victory, even though they joined in the war effort only in December 1941.
But now, it’s time to correct the records on who defeated the Nazis. Britain and Europe are doing their best, holding VE Day celebrations, in which Russia is excluded. And now, Donald Trump has issued a proclamation designating Thursday as a day for the United States to celebrate its victory in World War II -” we did more than any other Country, by far, in producing a victorious result on World War II”
President Donald Trump is busily correcting historical records, taking over the National Archives, or as he puts it RESTORING TRUTH AND SANITY TO AMERICAN HISTORY
So, between the entertainment culture, the political views of the Western Powers, and finally, no less a history expert than Donald Trump himself, we can hope that all that nonsense about Russia winning WW2 can be put to bed.
South Australia Liberals who first pushed 100 pct renewables – then went nuclear – now reverse course after poll wipeout
ReNewEconomy, May 5, 2025, Joshua S Hill
The South Australian Liberal party, which set the state’s first 100 per cent renewables target when in government six years ago, before embracing nuclear while in opposition, has reversed course again after the federal poll wipeout and the loss of a long time Liberal seat in Adelaide.
South Australia leads the world in the uptake of variable renewables, with a 72 per cent share of local demand over the last 12 months.
The then Liberal state government in 2019 set a target of reaching 100 per cent “net” renewables by 2030, before the current Labor government accelerated that target to 2027, and enshrined it into law, based on the planning for new wind and solar projects, battery storage and transmission.
New state Liberal leader Vincent Tarzia reversed course on renewables last year, supporting the federal Coalition’s plan to build nuclear power at seven sites across Australia, including at Port Augusta in South Australia, the site of the coal fired power stations that closed nearly a decade ago.
However, speaking to ABC Radio Adelaide, Tarzia has now backed away from his party’s election commitment to hold a Royal Commission into nuclear energy, saying it was clear that the technology has been “comprehensively rejected” by the electorate.
A potential nuclear future had been a top priority for the South Australian Liberal Party, promising in June last year to hold yet another Royal Commission into the technology. This was followed in August by the appointment of Stephen Patterson, the state MP for Morphett, as spokesman for Nuclear Readiness.
Tarzia’s comments came after the Liberals lost the last of their Adelaide based federal seats, including the once safe seat of Sturt, in last weekend’s federal election campaign…………………………………. https://reneweconomy.com.au/s-a-liberals-who-first-pushed-100-pct-renewables-then-went-nuclear-reverse-course-after-poll-wipeout/
5 huge climate opportunities await the next Australian parliament – and it has the numbers to deliver.
Australians have returned an expanded Labor Party to government alongside
a suite of climate-progressive independents. Meanwhile, the Coalition –
which promoted nuclear energy and a slower renewables transition –
suffered a historic defeat. Labor also looks set to have increased numbers
in the Senate, where the Greens are likely to hold the balance of power.
These numbers mean support for progressive climate and energy policy in
Australia’s 48th parliament is shaping as stronger than the last. So,
what does this mean as Australia seeks to position itself as a leader in
the global net zero economy?
The Conversation 5th May 2025 https://theconversation.com/5-huge-climate-opportunities-await-the-next-parliament-and-it-has-the-numbers-to-deliver-255772
Australian nuclear news 5 -12 May.
Headlines as they come in:
- I would’ve led a very ‘aggressive campaign’ says Tim Wilson as he backs nuclear.
- If the Coalition sticks with nuclear, the fallout will be toxic.
- Business as usual: Labor stalls on Defence reform as AUKUS woes grow.
- Coalition bombs itself with nuclear energy policy.
- US military expected to export ‘high-risk’ explosives to Australian ports amid arms expansion
- The pro-nuclear drive and Zionism are inter-twined
- Australians choose batteries over nuclear after election fought on energy.
- Is nuclear dead? Signs Coalition’s policy isn’t buried despite election loss.
- Scrap nuclear: Key Liberal senator wants radioactive energy plan buried.
- South Australia Liberals who first pushed 100 pct renewables – then went nuclear – now reverse course after poll wipeout.
- Will the Coalition ditch its nuclear power policy?
- 5 huge climate opportunities await the next Australian parliament – and it has the numbers to deliver.
- Australians choose batteries over nuclear after election fought on energy.
- Greens fear AUKUS overreach as State Development Coordination and Facilitation Bill 2025 passes SA parliament -ALSO AT ….
- State Liberals nuke nuclear promise.
- Re Australia lays out red carpet for rapid green energy transition– Can Labor seize the moment?
- Election Lesson: Coalition Must Dump Nuclear Policy
Nuclear news this week – not industry handouts
A bit of good news –
The global nuclear-free movement just had a thumping victory over the nuclear lobby. Australians voted in an unprecedented landslide to reject the Opposition’s pro nuclear policy, and to kick their leader right out of Parliament.
Australia is the only country in the world that is a nation-continent, a great island -continent with one federal government, and one predominant language. Already with a third of all households having solar power, and a pro-renewable energy government now thoroughly endorsed – Australia is set to be world leader in truly clean energy, and climate action.
TOP STORIES
NATO leaders as delusional as Zelensky on lost Ukraine war.
As US military prepares for war on China, Silicon Valley tech oligarchs are profiting.
Scotland does not need nuclear power and people aren’t being told the truth.
From the archives. TONY BLAIR: STILL A NUCLEAR NUTTER!.
Climate. Arctic plant study reveals an ‘early warning sign’ of climate change upheaval.
Noel’s notes. A resounding win for the world’s nuclear-free clean energy movement.AUSTRALIA
Pie in the sky? After the Coalition’s stinging loss, nuclear should be dead. Here’s why it might live on. Coalition to put nuclear plan
on the chopping block-ALSO AT https://antinuclear.net/2025/05/04/coalition-to-put-nuclear-plan-on-the-chopping-block/
Nuclear fallout: Coalition’s nuclear energy policy proved toxic to voters.
- Honest Government Ad | Our Nuclear Plan. – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JBqVVBUdW84
- What Australians really think of nuclear power.
- Firefighters and nurses call on Coalition to drop nuclear energy plans.
- Australians’ support for nuclear power ban rises despite Dutton’s best efforts to sell atomic future, survey finds.
- As Dutton champions nuclear power, Indigenous artists recall the profound loss of land and life that came from it.
- Government ignores AUKUS ‘very high risk’ warning from the Admiral in charge. Malcolm Turnbull hasn’t drunk the Kool-Aid on AUKUS | ABC NEWS – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ccQCTLhF1Do Why Military Neutrality is a Must for Australia.
- Confirmed: Australian weapons sold to Israel.
- More Australian nuclear news at https://antinuclear.net/2025/05/01/australian-nuclear-news-items-28-april-5-may/
NUCLEAR ITEMS
| ATROCITIES. As Israelis Blockade Food to Gaza, 9,000 Children have been Admitted for Acute Malnutrition. Israel Bombs Humanitarian Aid Flotilla on Way to Gaza. |
| ECONOMICS. EDF seeks joint financing for UK projects. |
| EDUCATION. Nuclear infiltrates: Students from three West Cumbrian schools are taking part in a challenge to build robots for the nuclear industry. |
| ENERGY. Dispatch from France | May ’25. |
| ENVIRONMENT. Tracing radiation through the Marshall Islands: Reflections from a Greenpeace nuclear specialist. Ohio EPA slams DOE’s sloppy radiation sampling plan for Piketon plant demolition. |
| ETHICS and RELIGION. Will the World Speak up Against Israel’s Likely Attack on Humanitarian Activists? Pope Francis Refused to Be Silent on Gaza – Will His Successor Follow Suit? |
| EVENTS. Sign the Petition to Deny LANL’s Request to Release Radioactive Tritium! |
| HISTORY. The World’s First Nuclear Meltdown: Chalk River | Fascinating Horror – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1WcBIzRzswg Niagara County New York Radiation Disaster -discovered in 2024 |
| LEGAL. The ICJ, Israel and the Gaza Blockade. EDF sues Czech competition authority over Dukovany nuclear tender. |
| MEDIA. Nuclear power is shaping up as an election loser, and the Murdoch media is not happy. |
| OPPOSITION to NUCLEAR . Updates on Palisades: Zombie reactor & “SMR” new builds. NUKE WASTE DUMP: Ojibwe Country once again targeted. |
| POLITICS. The Great British nuclear expansion is a project bound to fail. Senator Strangelove. |
| POLITICS INTERNATIONAL and DIPLOMACY. No Victory in Ukraine: The Costs of Western Delusion. Fantasy and Exploitation: The US-Ukraine Minerals Deal. UK in talks to buy back nuclear sites from French firm EDF. |
| PUBLIC OPINION. Six in 10 Americans Support US Participation in a Nuclear Agreement with Iran. |
| SAFETY. NUCLEAR STATION = WAR TARGET. Situation unstable: IAEA says shots were heard at Zaporizhzhia power plant. |
| SECRETS and LIES.Australia Islamic Caliphate? Dark money and the 11th hour Election propaganda blitzkrieg.Chernobyl’s Hidden Impact: Disinformation and Nuclear Politics.Covering up Ukrainian Nazis is nothing new – the Canadians have been doing it for almost eighty years.US-Ukraine minerals deal ‘hides secret agreements’ – Ukrainian MP. |
| SPINBUSTER. Campaigner hits out at ‘PR trick’ nuclear energy poll of SNP members. |
| WASTES. May Day – How Hot is Too Hot for a Ferociously Hot Nuclear Dump Under the Irish Sea-Bed?Sellafield plan for new building to store radioactive waste. |
| WAR and CONFLICT.Need to use nuclear weapons has not arisen in Ukraine, says Putin.For second time in 3 years Zelensky sabotages Ukraine war peace deal.Why is No. 1 US bombing No. 137 Yemen?India and Pakistan: Nations on brink of ‘nuclear war’. India and Pakistan: The nuclear standoff that we really should all be worried about. How bloody conflict 4,000 miles away could spark nuclear Armageddon killing billions. Danger of an India-Pakistan war and Canada’s Reactors . |
| WEAPONS and WEAPONS SALES. Republicans Unveil Bill To Bring 2025 Military Budget to Over $1 Trillion. Europe is drilling for World War III.Shut down Elbit Systems everywhere! |
Greens fear AUKUS overreach as State Development Coordination and Facilitation Bill 2025 passes SA parliament
A new $4m planning office will be granted unprecedented powers, sparking calls to temper the power of the four bureaucrats set to wield them.
Sweeping new powers will be invested in a $4m office to fast track “significant” SA projects including housing and AUKUS – raising fears they could avoid tougher planning checks.
The State Government is planning to appoint four staff to the office, including an AUKUS expert, with unprecedented powers to “case manage” projects.
Premier Peter Malinauskas has flagged this would allow faster approvals in designated “go zones” for projects like the AUKUS nuclear-powered submarines, housing and renewable energy projects.
The move flared concerns about existing heritage, environment, coastal protection and pastoral land act processes being downgraded after the State Development Coordination and Facilitation Bill 2025 passed this week.
Mr Malinauskas previously said the law meant the State Government could designate “state development areas” as “go-zones”.
Regulatory work in these zones would be completed before developers moved in “allowing for quicker approvals within them once an application is made”.
This was meant to save time in passing “urgent and significant projects”.
A government spokesperson assured provisions meant the new office must perform any assessment independently and it could not be directed “by any Minister to either approve or reject any application.”
The office could not deal with nuclear waste projects.
And the Adelaide Parklands was protected by the Adelaide Parklands Act and the new bill states it “may never be designated as a state development area”.
But SA Greens party co-leader Robert Simms was still concerned.
He feared the inclusion of an AUKUS expert meant approvals for the project would bypass usual safety guards.
“SA parliament has just given the Malinauskas Government the biggest blank cheque in South Australian history,” he said.
“This bill gives an unelected office the power to override South Australian laws to enable controversial projects, including AUKUS, yet it passed the Upper House in the blink of an eye.”
“This bill isn’t about facilitating housing developments, it’s about giving the state government the power to ride roughshod over the community. It’s a power grab of epic proportions that should have been given much more scrutiny.”
It was confirmed in the senate the office would cost $4m a year to operate.
Australia lays out red carpet for rapid green energy transition. Can Labor seize the moment?
Giles Parkinson, May 4, 2025, https://reneweconomy.com.au/australia-lays-out-red-carpet-for-rapid-green-energy-transition-can-labor-seize-the-moment/
What an opportunity Australia has before it.
The thumping victory to Labor, unimaginable just months ago, or even while chomping on the democracy sausage on Saturday afternoon, means that the Australian federal government now has a clear mandate to do something great – accelerate the transition to renewables and get really serious about climate targets.
Australia has rejected the Gina Rinehart vision of a nuclear-powered, iron-domed Australia living in climate denial and perpetual fear.
The foot soldiers Australia’s richest person sent into electoral battle, armed with real and imaginary MAGA caps, have been dispatched by voters. Opposition leader Peter Dutton has lost his seat, and energy spokesman Ted O’Brien very nearly did.
There will now be nearly as many independents in the lower house as there are Liberals, or members of the LNP or Nationals. How envious must the Americans feel! Trumpism has been repudiated. Common sense, respect for the science, and empathy has prevailed. And Australia can even be sure there will be another election in three years time. The US, not so much.
It is remarkable that, after two decades of political argy-bargy, the loudest and sanest voices across the floor from Labor will not be from seeking favours from the fossil fuel industry, but from those urging the government to go harder, to aim higher.
Green industry can hardly believe it, and leaders such as Andrew Forrest have already found their voice.
“This result sends a clear and unequivocal message: Australians will back and support policies that recognise the economic opportunities which come from acting on the existential threat of climate change,” Forrest said in a statement on Sunday.
“It shows that any party which seeks to govern this country must have a serious and credible plan to confront the climate crisis.
“In a turbulent world, Australia remains a strong, principled and pragmatic voice. We must now use that voice to back science, seize the green energy opportunity, and strengthen our role in the world with compassion, ambition and purpose.”
Forrest has been outspoken in his criticism of net zero targets, describing them as a “con”, because they essentially let fossil fuels off the hook for real action. He has set a target of “real zero” at his Pilbara iron ore mines by the end of the decade, which means burning no diesel and no gas for electricity or transport by 2030.
It is a stunningly ambitious goal, but in keeping with the need to act decisively on climate change. Australia’s climate targets are still lacklustre, but its government cannot now argue that it does not have the mandate to be bold.
In a few months Australia, which wants to host the 2026 UN climate conference, will need to submit its 2035 emissions reduction target. It has to respect the science. Is Labor satisfied with power for the sake of being in power, or does it wish to leave a lasting legacy, or will we regret it not being in minority government. It likely has another six years to actually Do Something.
But challenges remain, and while the election may be won, that could turn out to be the easy part. Energy and climate minister Chris Bowen and the Labor team have some thinking to do about the best and most equitable way to deliver the second and most challenging part of the green energy transition.
It’s 20 years since John Howard, under intense pressure from a fossil fuel lobby horrified by a proposed extension to the mandatory renewable energy target that would have doubled the share of wind and solar from 1 pct to 2 per cent of generation, threw that policy out the door.
Australia is now at 40 per cent renewables, aiming to double that to 82 per cent renewables by 2030. South Australia, already at more than 70 per cent wind and solar, aims to reach 100 per cent “net renewables” by the end of 2027.
Bowen’s big challenge to deliver that federal target is to ensure that enough wind and solar gets built in time, and at scale. Challenges remain in equipment supplies, inflation in civil construction costs, and securing a skilled labour force – and the likes of Barnaby Joyce in the principality of New England will not easily give up their fight.
Bowen’s focus will be making sure that the Capacity Investment Scheme delivers wind, solar and storage in the right timeframe, but even that won’t be enough to reach the party’s target.
Policies and planning blueprints will need to adapt. The Tim Nelson review of market rules and incentives will be critical, as will the next edition of the Integrated System Plan. More needs to be done to encourage electrification, consumer energy resources, and alternatives to big transmission and renewable energy zones.
And there is going to be fascinating debate among the grid experts about how to manage the final stages of this transition from a centralised grid dominated by fossil fuels, to a distributed, inverter-based system built around consumer assets, large-scale wind and solar, and storage.
Australia is at the forefront of this transition, and the Australian public, and particularly its media, needs to get its head around the issues, because consumers are going to be at the heart of this – and they needed to be informed, not misled.
“Now is the time for conviction and courage to double down and move at the speed the climate science dictates,” says Tim Buckley, from Climate and Energy Finance. “There are plenty of challenges, but the risks and costs of too-slow action are clear. This is an intergenerational game changer moment!”
Australians choose batteries over nuclear after election fought on energy
While the Greens have an anxious wait ahead to see how many lower seats they’ll win, they recorded their highest-ever primary vote and will hold the balance of power in the Senate with 11 senators.
While the Greens have an anxious wait ahead to see how many lower seats they’ll win, they recorded their highest-ever primary vote and will hold the balance of power in the Senate with 11 senators.
ABC News, By climate reporters Jess Davis and Jo Lauder, 6 May 25
When Peter Dutton unveiled his party’s nuclear energy plan last year, it opened up a seismic difference between the two major parties.
It offered a real choice for Australian voters over the future of the country’s energy policy.
“I’m very happy for the election to be a referendum on energy, on nuclear, on power prices, on lights going out, on who has a sustainable pathway for our country going forward,” he said.
Taken on those terms, Saturday’s election outcome was an endorsement of renewable energy over nuclear.
“It’s clearly a referendum on energy policy, given the prominence of energy throughout the entire election campaign,” Clean Energy Council CEO Kane Thornton said.
“I think it’s an emphatic victory for Australia’s transition to clean energy.”
At a household level, Labor offered a significant discount on home batteries to accompany the booming solar on rooftops all across the country, aiming to get 1 million batteries installed under the scheme by 2030.
The last election saw a new generation of independents join the parliament, riding a wave of climate concern. Any expectation that the “teals” were a single-election trend has been dispelled, with most of them set to be returned, and new ones joining their ranks.
While the Greens have an anxious wait ahead to see how many lower seats they’ll win, they recorded their highest-ever primary vote and will hold the balance of power in the Senate with 11 senators.
After losing the Liberal heartland to the teals in the last election, the Coalition decided to pitch instead to the outer suburbs.
But the decision to campaign against renewables, and scrap climate policies such as the EV tax breaks, seems to mismatch the views of middle Australia.
Outer suburbs embrace solar power
Dutton set out to make up gains in the outer suburbs by offering a discount on the fuel excise. But the data for solar uptake and electric cars paints a very different picture to the caricature of solar and batteries as a plaything for the inner city.
While energy may not have been a top concern for voters, it’s the outer suburbs where our love for rooftop solar is at its highest, especially in Queensland and Western Australia.
In Dutton’s former electorate of Dickson, some 60 per cent of households have a solar system, double the national average, according to data from the Clean Energy Regulator………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-05-06/federal-election-shows-voters-support-renewables-over-nuclear/105252888
State Liberals nuke nuclear promise
The SA Liberals have broken a key election promise with just 10 months to go until the state poll, with Liberal leader Vincent Tarzia dumping his party’s only energy policy.
5 May 25,https://www.premier.sa.gov.au/media-releases/news-items/state-liberals-nuke-nuclear-promise
In a stunning backdown, Mr Tarzia admitted on ABC Radio Adelaide that the Liberals’ election commitment to hold a Royal Commission into nuclear energy would be dumped in the wake of the federal election:
Rory McClaren: That’s what I was going to ask you… should nuclear from a Liberal Party policy perspective now be parked?
Vincent Tarzia: Yes, at the moment it’s been comprehensively rejected and we know the thing is with the energy transition, in three years’ time we will be in another position again.
The State Liberals made the pursuit of nuclear power their top priority, announcing their pursuit of a Royal Commission as their key commitment in their Budget Reply speech in June.
In August, Liberal Leader Vincent Tarzia appointed Stephen Patterson as Shadow Minister for Nuclear Readiness.
Now, just eight months later, the promise has been abandoned.
The 2016 Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission found nuclear power was not commercially viable in South Australia.
Quotes
Attributable to Tom Koutsantonis
What do the South Australian Liberals stand for?
They’re breaking election promises even before they’ve got to an election.
Only a few months ago, they were making the pursuit of nuclear energy their sole energy policy focus. Now, they’ve dumped it.
Vincent Tarzia must now dump his Shadow Minister for Nuclear Readiness, who has absolutely no policy offering other than the pursuit of an energy source that evidence shows will drive up bills for South Australians.
At a time when the Opposition should be outlining its policy platform ahead of the 2026 State Election, the State Liberals are instead ditching their only energy policy.
Election Lesson: Coalition Must Dump Nuclear Policy
Friends of the Earth Adelaide Federal Election Campaign, Philip White May 5, 2025
Friends of the Earth Adelaide ran a targeted campaign in two marginal seats leading up to the federal election. We created an election leaflet advising voters about the dangers of nuclear power and asking them to “vote nuclear free”.
We are pleased that the Australian people rejected the nuclear option. We hope the Coalition gets the message and dumps its nuclear energy policy and becomes a constructive supporter of real climate action. Let this election mark an end to the climate wars.
Boothby
We delivered 50,000 of our leaflets to the letterboxes of voters in Boothby, a marginal seat in southern Adelaide held by Labor on a 3.3% margin prior to the election. Our aim was to prevent Boothby falling to a pro-nuclear candidate. We are very grateful to a grant from FOE Australia which paid for much of the printing and distribution of 45,000 of the leaflets by Australia Post. The remaining 5,000 leaflets were delivered by hand by our volunteers, who we are also very grateful to. We considered that a good reach of the 80,000 letterboxes in Boothby.
We are very pleased that Boothby was retained by an anti-nuclear candidate (Louise Miller-Frost for Labor, with Joanna Wells of the Greens also doing well). That’s one more seat to keep Australia free from nuclear power. We hope that the large loss the Coalition received means they will drop nuclear power as a policy.
Sturt
In late April a bus load of Traditional Owners from Port Augusta came to the city for a meeting in the marginal eastern Adelaide suburb of Sturt, held by the Liberals on a 0.5% margin prior to the election. Their aim was to appeal to Sturt voters for their support in keeping Port Augusta nuclear free. Friends of the Earth Adelaide co-hosted the meeting along with Don’t Nuke Port Augusta, with financial help from CANA. Traditional Owners spoke strongly of their lives and love for Port Augusta’s land and waterways, and of the tragic intergenerational consequences for their families of the nuclear testing in SA in the 1950s. The meeting was videoed and can be seen at https://www.youtube.com/live/lJ1tpcfkZIU and many great photos are on the Don’t Nuke Port Augusta Facebook page.
The Port Augusta contingent were prominent at the May Day Worker’s Right’s rally the following day. They got a great shoutout from the MC, the SA Unions Secretary, and huge applause and appreciation from the crowd of unionists. Also, that evening, they staged a demonstration at the Arkaba Hotel where Peter Dutton was promoting the Liberal candidate for Sturt. They said, “If Dutton won’t visit us, we’ll come to him.”
Nationals MPs ‘100 per cent’ back nuclear being kept as Coalition dissects loss
ABC News, By political reporter Jake Evans. 5 May 25
In short:
The Coalition will dissect its election loss, with one frontbencher saying the party’s nuclear policy must be part of that assessment.
Two Nationals MPs have urged that it be kept, suggesting it was not to blame for the loss.
What’s next?
The Liberal and National parties will review their election loss once seats are finalised.
Two Nationals MPs have publicly backed the Coalition sticking with its nuclear plan, with leader David Littleproud claiming the party had a “flawless campaign” even though its senior partner was routed.
Queenslanders Colin Boyce and Michelle Landry have called for the Coalition’s signature energy policy to be re-endorsed when the parties review an election that saw the Liberal Party lose 14 seats at current count and be all but exiled from Australia’s cities.
However, Nationals leader David Littleproud, who celebrated on election night that his party had run a “flawless campaign”, gave an early signal yesterday that the Nationals would not pin the blame on a promise to build seven nuclear power stations.
“We’re going to work through all of those, I don’t think nuclear was the reason we lost this,” he told Sky News.
Mr Littleproud suffered a personal swing against him in Maranoa, one of the seven proposed nuclear sites.
There was also a swing against the National and Liberal candidates in Hunter, another proposed site, but elsewhere the results were mixed, such as in O’Connor, where the Nationals had a large swing towards them away from Liberal incumbent Rick Wilson.
Flynn MP Colin Boyce, one of the fiercest advocates for nuclear power in the Coalition, said nuclear was a good policy that was not successfully argued.
“One hundred per cent, I would like to see it hung onto,” Mr Boyce said.
“I think during the cycle, there was not enough detail, certainly not enough detail around the reality of costings, timeframes, you take water, for example — the Labor party put out some rhetoric that there was not enough water, well I would argue there are other options to cool a nuclear facility.
“It’s nonsense, some of these arguments, but none of them were articulated well enough.”
Mr Boyce said the policy was not discussed a great deal during the campaign, but said it was “arguable” whether an anti-nuclear campaign run by Labor was what undid Liberal leader Peter Dutton………………….
Capricornia MP Michelle Landry also urged that the nuclear policy be kept.
“I had fairly positive feedback on it, I don’t think we sold it well enough … and we also should have knocked on the head the lies of the unions and the Labor Party,” Ms Landry told ABC Capricornia.
…………………………… Climate policy contentions within Coalition
The Nationals have led the charge for years on nuclear, eventually convincing its senior Liberal partner to adopt a nuclear strategy in the last term.
Debate over energy and cutting carbon emissions in the electricity sector has caused ructions within the Coalition for generations, and been instrumental in the toppling of former leaders.
The parties were finally united under former prime minister Scott Morrison, who won an agreement with then-Nationals leader Barnaby Joyce to formally sign up to the Paris climate agreement to reach net zero emissions by 2050.
But determining the pathway to achieve that has continued to pose a challenge within the Coalition — Nationals senator Matt Canavan suggested late last year that the nuclear policy was introduced as a political fix to those arguments, and that the Coalition was “not serious” about it as a solution.
The Liberal Party is still picking through the wreckage of Saturday night and will not begin to review the loss until after seats are finalised.
But Tasmanian frontbencher Jonno Duniam said when that time comes, nuclear must be part of a complete review.
“It’s probably going to be one of those things that’s on the table for discussion,” Senator Duniam said.
A year ago, when defeated Liberal leader Peter Dutton announced the Coalition’s plan for seven nuclear power plants, the opposition leader said he would be happy to contest a federal election on the policy.
“I’m very happy for the election to be a referendum on energy, on nuclear, on power prices, on lights going out,” Mr Dutton said in June. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-05-05/nationals-keep-nuclear-coalition-review-election-2025-loss/105253116
Australia lays out red carpet for rapid green energy transition. Can Labor seize the moment?
Giles Parkinson, May 4, 2025. https://reneweconomy.com.au/australia-lays-out-red-carpet-for-rapid-green-energy-transition-can-labor-seize-the-moment/
What an opportunity Australia has before it.
The thumping victory to Labor, unimaginable just months ago, or even while chomping on the democracy sausage on Saturday afternoon, means that the Australian federal government now has a clear mandate to do something great – accelerate the transition to renewables and get really serious about climate targets.
Australia has rejected the Gina Rinehart vision of a nuclear-powered, iron-domed Australia living in climate denial and perpetual fear.
The foot soldiers Australia’s richest person sent into electoral battle, armed with real and imaginary MAGA caps, have been dispatched by voters. Opposition leader Peter Dutton has lost his seat, and energy spokesman Ted O’Brien very nearly did.
There will now be nearly as many independents in the lower house as there are Liberals, or members of the LNP or Nationals. How envious must the Americans feel! Trumpism has been repudiated. Common sense, respect for the science, and empathy has prevailed. And Australia can even be sure there will be another election in three years time. The US, not so much.
It is remarkable that, after two decades of political argy-bargy, the loudest and sanest voices across the floor from Labor will not be from seeking favours from the fossil fuel industry, but from those urging the government to go harder, to aim higher.
Green industry can hardly believe it, and leaders such as Andrew Forrest have already found their voice.
“This result sends a clear and unequivocal message: Australians will back and support policies that recognise the economic opportunities which come from acting on the existential threat of climate change,” Forrest said in a statement on Sunday.
“In a turbulent world, Australia remains a strong, principled and pragmatic voice. We must now use that voice to back science, seize the green energy opportunity, and strengthen our role in the world with compassion, ambition and purpose.”
Forrest has been outspoken in his criticism of net zero targets, describing them as a “con”, because they essentially let fossil fuels off the hook for real action. He has set a target of “real zero” at his Pilbara iron ore mines by the end of the decade, which means burning no diesel and no gas for electricity or transport by 2030.
It is a stunningly ambitious goal, but in keeping with the need to act decisively on climate change. Australia’s climate targets are still lacklustre, but its government cannot now argue that it does not have the mandate to be bold.
In a few months Australia, which wants to host the 2026 UN climate conference, will need to submit its 2035 emissions reduction target. It has to respect the science. Is Labor satisfied with power for the sake of being in power, or does it wish to leave a lasting legacy, or will we regret it not being in minority government. It likely has another six years to actually Do Something.
But challenges remain, and while the election may be won, that could turn out to be the easy part. Energy and climate minister Chris Bowen and the Labor team have some thinking to do about the best and most equitable way to deliver the second and most challenging part of the green energy transition.
It’s 20 years since John Howard, under intense pressure from a fossil fuel lobby horrified by a proposed extension to the mandatory renewable energy target that would have doubled the share of wind and solar from 1 pct to 2 per cent of generation, threw that policy out the door.
Australia is now at 40 per cent renewables, aiming to double that to 82 per cent renewables by 2030. South Australia, already at more than 70 per cent wind and solar, aims to reach 100 per cent “net renewables” by the end of 2027.
Bowen’s big challenge to deliver that federal target is to ensure that enough wind and solar gets built in time, and at scale. Challenges remain in equipment supplies, inflation in civil construction costs, and securing a skilled labour force – and the likes of Barnaby Joyce in the principality of New England will not easily give up their fight.
Bowen’s focus will be making sure that the Capacity Investment Scheme delivers wind, solar and storage in the right timeframe, but even that won’t be enough to reach the party’s target.
Policies and planning blueprints will need to adapt. The Tim Nelson review of market rules and incentives will be critical, as will the next edition of the Integrated System Plan. More needs to be done to encourage electrification, consumer energy resources, and alternatives to big transmission and renewable energy zones.
And there is going to be fascinating debate among the grid experts about how to manage the final stages of this transition from a centralised grid dominated by fossil fuels, to a distributed, inverter-based system built around consumer assets, large-scale wind and solar, and storage.
Australia is at the forefront of this transition, and the Australian public, and particularly its media, needs to get its head around the issues, because consumers are going to be at the heart of this – and they needed to be informed, not misled.
“Now is the time for conviction and courage to double down and move at the speed the climate science dictates,” says Tim Buckley, from Climate and Energy Finance. “There are plenty of challenges, but the risks and costs of too-slow action are clear. This is an intergenerational game changer moment!”
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
21 April Webinar: No Nuclear Weapons in Australia
Start: 2026-04-21 18:00:00 UTC Canberra, Melbourne, Sydney (GMT+10:00)
End: 2026-04-21 19:30:00 UTC Canberra, Melbourne, Sydney (GMT+10:00)
Event Type: Virtual
A virtual link will be communicated before the event.
Host Contact Info: australia@icanw.org
of the week – Australians for War Powers Reform (AWPR)
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity
Antinuclear 