澳洲核活动家Jim Green在Pearls & Irritations网站上发表题为《达顿的核暴行》（Dutton’s nuclear thuggery）的评论文章。
According to the article, the Coalition's plans for a nuclear power plant have met with strong opposition from the Labour government. Still, the coalition government will ignore the opinions of the states and territories, or landowners, and force the nuclear power plant to work.
*The full text is as follows:*
The Coalition's nuclear energy project has been opposed by five Labor governments, with Victoria, NSW and Queensland all having laws banning nuclear energy. If state legislation is thought to bring some legal protection or political advantage, or both, the Labor governments in South Australia and Western Australia are likely to follow suit. If Dutton wins the election, will his Coalition government be able to overturn state laws banning nuclear energy?
Anne Twomey, a professor at the University of Sydney with extensive experience in teaching and practicing constitutional law, believes states may not be able to prevent the federal government from building nuclear power plants or the necessary related operations, such as transmission lines and the transportation of nuclear waste. So, will Dutton's Coalition government overturn state opposition to nuclear power plants? Almost certainly will.
National Party leader David Littleproud said in March that "if the Australian people vote for us, that's a clear directive to state governors – they should give way".
Dutton (Image source: Internet)
The federal government of the Coalition and Labor has attempted to establish national nuclear waste dumping sites in South Australia and the Northern Territory, despite state/territory laws prohibiting nuclear waste disposal facilities.
These attempts have failed, mainly due to opposition from the local indigenous community.
Legal issues have prevented three of the four proposed nuclear dumping sites – Woomera (South Australia) under the Howard government, Muckaty (Northern Territory) under the Albert government and Kimba (South Australia) under the Morrison and Albanese governments. But these legal difficulties could have been overcome if the government of the time had been ruthless enough and had not suffered too much political pain for its racist, undemocratic atrocities.
There is no doubt that Dutton's coalition government will ignore the will of traditional owners and Native Title holders who oppose the construction of nuclear reactors.
Their land rights and the right to protect their natural heritage will be denied, as is the case in the nuclear waste dumping proposal.
David Littleproud (Image source: Internet)
*Compulsory Takeover*
What about the companies that own land that the Coalition has targeted for the construction of nuclear power plants, and who have billion-dollar plans to develop their own clean energy industrial hubs based on renewable energy?
Energy Minister Chris Bowen said six of the seven owners of the proposed sites had vetoed the possibility of building nuclear reactors locally.
Dutton didn't bother to consult with the companies, but he had sought legal advice.
Here's what he said: "We're going to work with these companies, with the owners of these locations. If we find a situation where we apply the national interest test and require the parcel to become part of the national grid, then the legal advice we get is that the federal government has full authority to compel the acquisition of the parcel with full compensation. ”
Nor did the League bother to consult the communities surrounding the nuclear reactor target site. And, as with the state government and the owners of the targeted sites, the objections of the local community will be overturned.
(Image source: Internet)
Perin Davey, deputy leader of the National Party, had falsely stated that the Union would not impose nuclear power plants on communities that were firmly opposed.
Littleproud corrects this statement: "She's not right, we've made it clear.
Dutton and David Littleproud, as part of the Union government, are ready to make tough decisions for the good of the country. Similarly, Dutton also stated that "I think Perin made a mistake yesterday and everybody makes that mistake every now and then...... We have identified seven sites and we believe it is in the interest of the community and the country to move forward."
Obviously, democracy is for cowards and traitors who oppose the "national interest" in the eyes of Dutton and Littleproud. All of this is in stark contrast to a 2019 parliamentary inquiry led by current Shadow Energy Minister Ted O'Brien.
In 2019, announcing the release of a parliamentary report entitled "Not without your approval: a way forward for nuclear technology in Australia", O'Brien said future governments would only have to commit to "making community consent a condition for approving any nuclear power or nuclear waste disposal facility". in order to continue to develop nuclear power.
He also spoke vaguely about "maintaining social licensing based on trust and transparency" and putting the Australian people "at the centre of any approval process". But this is no longer what it used to be, and national interests are now "at stake".
(Image source: Internet)
Professor Anne Twomey pointed out that the Dutton government needed to get legislation through Parliament (including the Senate) to repeal federal laws banning nuclear power and "give the necessary legal support to the Australian nuclear industry".
An uncooperative Senate may block Dutton's nuclear energy program, but it won't stop him from expanding and extending the use of fossil fuels and undermining the renewable energy transition.
Only voters can do that.
*Nan*
Whether we want it or not, and whether we need additional power supply, South Australia will build one or more nuclear reactors.
Over the past 16 years, South Australia's renewable electricity supply has increased from 1% to 74% and the government aims to achieve 100% net renewable energy by 2027. While the 2027 deadline is in question, it is certain that by the time nuclear reactors are likely to start generating electricity in more than 20 years, we will have 100% net renewable energy.
One of the seven sites targeted by the League, Northern Power Station near Port Augusta, was closed in 2016 and the area has since become a hub for renewable energy.
Were Dutton and O'Brien unaware of these advances?
Are they planning to transition South Australia from renewable to nuclear?
Their plans to build a nuclear power plant in South Australia are non-negotiable, and it's hard to believe that this is anything but ill-conceived, uncosted.
(Image source: Internet)
The Coalition insists that nuclear power will lower electricity bills, but there is no evidence to support this claim, and there is plenty of evidence that this is not the case.
The Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO)'s "GenCost" report, a report prepared for the Clean Energy Council by Egis, a leading global consultancy, architecture and engineering firm, a recent report on small modular reactors by the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis, and a new economic analysis report by investment firm Lazard do not support this claim.
South Australian Premier Peter Malinauskas was unconvinced by the Coalition's economic propositions, saying: "Every objective, independent analysis points to the point that nuclear power will make electricity more expensive in Australia, not cheaper. I don't understand at all why we are imposing this burden on our country's electricity consumers. ”
/*本文作者Jim Green是“澳洲地球之友”（Friends of the Earth Australia）的全国核活动家，也是向参议院调查提交的详细意见书的主要作者。 /