Peter Garrett approves another uranium mine

The Hon Greg Hunt MP
Shadow Minister for Climate Change, Environment and Water (to 8 December 2009)

This is what Peter Garrett used to say about uranium mining in Australia:

“I have long been opposed to uranium mining, and I remain opposed to it. I am unapologetic about this. In fact, I am proud of it.”

That’s what he said at the 2007 ALP National Conference (speech attached, below).

And this is what Peter Garrett told JJJ’s Hack program in 2006:

RONAN SHARKEY:

Can you tell us your position on uranium mining?

PETER GARRETT:

Absolutely. I don’t think we should be expanding our uranium mining industry.

RONAN SHARKEY:

But do you do still support uranium mining that’s happening now?

PETER GARRETT:

Well, I’ve got news for you here, mate. We’re sitting in opposition. I’m not supporting any uranium mining of any kind actually.

RONAN SHARKEY:

That’s Peter Garrett, Labor’s Parliamentary Secretary for Reconciliation and the Arts and also a former member of the Nuclear Disarmament Party in the 1980s.

In 2008 Peter Garrett approved the expansion of the Heathgate Resources Beverley Uranium Mine in South Australia. In 2009 he approved the Four Mile uranium mine, also in South Australia.

Somewhere along his journey Peter Garrett has gone from “long been opposed to uranium mining” to the Minister Who Approves Uranium Mining.

The Coalition has long supported the mining and export of uranium as part of our contribution to helping the world to produce clean energy. Against that clear principle, we will review the specifics of this mine for any local environmental effects.

But just like his promises on solar energy and whaling, the promises Peter Garrett chose to make on uranium mining stand for nothing - and nor does he, any longer.

..........................................................................................

Speech: 2007 ALP National Conference - Uranium

Peter Garrett MP Shadow Minister for Climate Change, Environment and Heritage

There are strongly held views on this issue – that is well understood and respected.

I welcome the fact that in this party, we can openly debate differences.

Now, I have always maintained and indeed committed myself to the notion that Australia should be nuclear free – that our country is as far into nuclear activities as it ever should be.

I visited the shrine at Hiroshima. I know the history of Maralinga. And I’ve witnessed the struggle at Jabiluka.

I have long been opposed to uranium mining, and I remain opposed to it.

I am unapologetic about this. In fact, I am proud of it.

And I am proud it is a view shared by many at this conference, by a majority of rank and file members of the Party and by a majority of Australians.

And they have been contacting me, in increasing numbers, saying clearly that they do not wish us to make a decision today which sees an expansion of uranium mining.

My reason for this objection is based on the principle that I believe no generation should appropriate the future. The risks are greater than the benefits.

And with radioactive waste, no issue has a greater purchase on the future than this issue does.

Uranium mining leads inextricably to uranium waste.

Radioactive waste is toxic material which lasts for tens and hundreds of thousands of years.

Delegates, each generation is faced with different choices. These involve balancing competing interests, evaluating risks and benefits and aiming to make decisions which add to the common good; decisions which better prepare us for tomorrow.

So we have an important decision to reach here at this Conference.

For those who say we must expand this industry to meet the climate change challenge:

I say, is the only way to meet this challenge by producing more radioactive waste and more materials for nuclear weapons? Why would we do this in a world where terrorism is on the rise, where nuclear proliferation veers out of control and where safeguards and security simply aren’t working?

We must and we can invest significant political will, and intellectual and financial capital in climate change solutions that don’t create new and additional security and environmental problems. We should export those solutions to the world.

For those who say we should expand uranium mining, with the focus on the highest possible safety and environmental safeguards, I say turn the equation around.

Let us commit ourselves to actually achieving safety and environmental safeguards first – safeguards that are accepted by the community, by a community that is fully informed.

And remember that no Australian State – including South Australia – has ever been willing to accept even the relatively small volumes of domestic radioactive waste. This is understandable given the process entered into by the Howard Government, but no State has.

Now that waste is now being forced on the people of the Northern Territory by the Howard Government.

For those that argue uranium mining will benefit Indigenous communities, I can point to Indigenous communities clear in their opposition to uranium mining.

We must ensure that National Parks and World Heritage Areas are properly protected.

Delegates, as I said recently to the Kingsford Smith FEC, at the end of the day, we cannot absolutely guarantee Australian uranium won’t end up in nuclear weapons – but we can guarantee all Australian uranium will become nuclear waste.

This is not a legacy we should leave to our kids, nor to the world.

Share via:

Kwoff

Digg

Delicious

Newsvine

Facebook

StumbleUpon