Stuart Henry (Hasluck, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

Nuclear technology and its place in the Australian community have received a lot of attention in recent times. The Australian public has a range of strong and often conflicting views on nuclear energy. Local residents in my electorate of Hasluck hold a wide variety of opinions, from abject fear of nuclear technology to enthusiastic advocacy of nuclear technology as a solution to all of our problems. For that reason it is important for the government to ensure that policy and legislation regarding nuclear technology in Australia are sensible, responsible and clear.

With that in mind, I am pleased to speak in support of the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation Amendment Bill 2006 today. The Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation, or ANSTO, as it is more commonly known, is the nation’s leading nuclear research and development organisation and the centre of our nuclear expertise. The facility operates under a 1987 act of parliament and is responsible for delivering specialised advice, scientific services and products to not only government but industry, academia and other research organisations.

The infrastructure includes the research reactor known as HIFAR, particle accelerators, radiopharmaceutical production and a range of unique research equipment. As HIFAR reaches the end of its productive life it will be replaced by ANSTO’s open pool Australian light water reactor, or OPAL. This is a more modern reactor which will soon be online. This reactor has a larger capacity and a longer life span and makes use of new technologies. ANSTO also operates the National Medical Cyclotron at Royal Prince Alfred Hospital which produces short-lived radioisotopes for our medical purposes. The ANSTO board currently and typically comprises some of the nation’s leading scientists, medical doctors, engineers and business experts. More than 800 staff work within ANSTO. Together the board and the staff represent the nation’s nuclear leadership and have done an outstanding job.

I take the time to mention these benefits because I believe that they are underrecognised and because they are relevant to the rationale of this amendment bill. These examples clearly demonstrate the extraordinary level of expertise, infrastructure and leadership that Australia has in ANSTO and why this government believes it is sensible and reasonable to correct anomalies in the act that restrict ANSTO’s operations, to the benefit of our nation. These benefits are significant and far reaching, covering health, environmental, industrial and strategic issues. For example, each year ANSTO products treat over half a million Australians who have serious illnesses such as cancer. Unfortunately, the demand for this type of assistance grows each year and currently, on average, every Australian will have at least one radioisotope procedure in the interests of their health.

Research is continuing into new nuclear treatments not only for cancer but also for conditions such as Alzheimer’s disease. ANSTO’s environmental research work includes crucial issues such as climate change, water management, pollution tracking, erosion and salinity. Across the fields of industry, ANTSO products are used for agriculture, mining, construction and manufacturing and in the areas of non-nuclear power generation. Strategically, ANSTO’s leadership and expertise ensure that Australia has both a voice and a place in international decision making on nuclear issues. ANSTO’s track record of acting in Australia’s best interests is clearly exemplary.

This amendment bill is needed for two reasons: firstly, Australia will soon have a state-of-the-art nuclear waste facility in the Northern Territory; and, secondly, the world we live in has changed. The 1987 act places restrictions on ANSTO that are outdated and will be more so when the planned Commonwealth radioactive waste management facility in the Northern Territory becomes a reality. For example, there are currently around 30 Commonwealth sites other than Lucas Heights where radioactive waste is produced and/or stored. The new facility in the Northern Territory is designed to provide long-term storage for nuclear waste, but that waste has to be conditioned and repackaged first. The current legislation prevents ANSTO from doing so. It makes no sense to create new legislation only to duplicate services already available at Lucas Heights. This bill includes amendments designed to remove these outdated restrictions. It allows ANSTO to participate fully in establishing and operating the new facility in the Northern Territory.

Amendments to the ANSTO Act in 1992 restricting ANSTO’s powers to hold radioactive waste were prompted by fears that Lucas Heights may become the site of a national nuclear waste repository. These concerns were justifiable at the time given the Labor government illegally stored some 10,000 drums of low-level radioactive waste on the site. Given the Commonwealth’s decision to establish a new facility for the responsible management of all Commonwealth radioactive wastes, there are no longer any grounds for such concern. The Commonwealth government is proceeding to establish its own radioactive waste management facility in the Northern Territory under the Commonwealth Radioactive Waste Management Act 2005. The radioactive waste currently stored at ANSTO includes waste stored since the 1960s. It will be transferred to the radioactive waste facility in the Northern Territory once it is operational.

Spent fuel from ANSTO’s HIFAR research reactor is currently being processed under contract in expert facilities in both Scotland and France. These facilities will convert the spent fuel into intermediate level waste ready for safe long-term storage and eventual safe disposal here in Australia, as is our national responsibility. This waste will start returning to Australia from 2011. The bill includes amendments intended to put ANSTO’s authority to accept this reprocessing waste beyond doubt. It makes sense that ANSTO should play the lead role not only in an emergency but also in the prevention of emergencies by working with state and federal police or other agencies that may require help and advice on radiological issues, such as dealing with radioactive evidence.

Whatever the scale or specifics of a radioactive situation, we would all want those with the nation’s best expertise and best facilities to be able to respond quickly to protect our citizens and environment. We would need them to work as effectively and as efficiently as possible with state and federal police and other agencies which may require their assistance. This may involve storage of radioactive material gathered by police or Customs services. The last thing we would want at such a time would be for ANSTO’s actions to be hampered by restrictions on what they were and were not allowed to handle and who they were or were not allowed to assist. These amendments will ensure that ANSTO will not have to rely on parliament at such a time. This is clearly important for public health and safety, but it is also important to ensure that Australia is in line with the standards set down in the United Nations International Convention for the Suppression of Acts of Nuclear Terrorism and to allow us to properly consider our response to this convention.

Nuclear technology is a complex issue which deserves better than scare tactics and rhetoric. There are serious concerns and safety issues which I would never attempt to trivialise, and neither would the experts who know far more than me on this topic. However, I do know that they wish the community understood more about the contribution nuclear technology makes in all of our lives and that the safety issues are seen in context. For example, the vast majority of our nuclear waste is low level, which is less dangerous to transport than more commonplace substances such as fuel or fertiliser. In fact, you could stand beside a transport vehicle for two hours and receive less radiation than if you flew from Sydney to Los Angeles and back.

I have information from ANSTO regarding the safety of various methods of power generation as measured by the number of severe accidents—that is, accidents with more than five fatalities. In OECD countries there have been no accidents and obviously no fatalities in the nuclear power industry. This compares with 75 accidents resulting in 2,259 fatalities in the coal power industry and 165 accidents resulting in 3,789 fatalities in the oil and gas industry. These figures indicate that our concerns regarding nuclear energy are often grounded in emotion and not necessarily in fact. In particular, research reactors have been operating around the world for many decades with no external public health or safety incidents. ANSTO’s main site at Lucas Heights is located 40 kilometres south-west of Sydney’s central business district. It occupies 70 hectares and is surrounded by a 1.6-kilometre buffer zone. This is far more than is commonly found in other countries. ANSTO’s performance record is something to be extremely proud of.

The Howard government’s approach to nuclear issues is sensible and responsible. Perhaps more importantly, our approach has been consistent. This is in stark contrast to that of members opposite. Not only are their ranks fundamentally divided on the issue of nuclear power, but also the Leader of the Opposition changes his own mind at a moment’s notice—three mines, no mines, as many mines as you like.

The member for Grayndler is not the only one confused by the Leader of the Opposition’s rollover. Only two months ago, the Leader of the Opposition and Senator Sterle were in my electorate of Hasluck, telling the 23 people attending a morning tea in High Wycombe that the Howard government had secret plans to build a nuclear reactor in Hasluck. Can you believe it? It is this sort of scaremongering and opportunism which has become the hallmark of Labor’s contribution to policy debate in this country, particularly regarding nuclear energy.

I am pleased that the Prime Minister has initiated debate in this country on our future use of nuclear energy by establishing a task force to investigate uranium mining, export and nuclear energy issues in Australia. This is a national debate that we must have. We can no longer fool ourselves that oil and gas will keep our society going forever. It is clear that dwindling reserves and financial and environmental costs will bring an end to the days of fossil fuels in the near future.

It is also clear that our energy demands cannot be met purely by solar panels, biofuels and wind farms. I have no doubt that they can, and do, make a valuable contribution to our energy supply, but as Allan Patience argued in the Age newspaper in June last year ‘they simply cannot meet our demands for energy’. This view is indicative of almost every opinion I have seen regarding renewable energy sources. In that same article, Allan Patience offered us the stark choice we must make, and make soon: do we embrace nuclear power generation or do we drastically reduce our per capita energy consumption? I would suggest that, while there are many innovations and programs which will reduce our energy use, these reductions will not be sufficiently significant to release us from our difficult choice.

David Noonan, the campaign officer for the Australian Conservation Foundation, unsurprisingly is a dissenting voice in this debate. Mr Noonan maintains that ‘there is no economic or environmental case for Australia to build nuclear power plants’. I disagree, in that I believe every option should be explored and that nuclear power has significant advantages. Mr Noonan, and many other members of the environmental lobby, cling to an unrealistic belief that a renewable energy source that will satisfy all our needs is just around the corner, if not already here.

The simple fact is that viable renewable energy may never be achievable. Reality must be taken into account at some point. We cannot go on believing in a fairytale. ANSTO must be given a more free hand to be involved in our nuclear future, whatever it may be. ANSTO are the experts—they have been dealing with nuclear energy safely and sensibly for 20 years. Who better to guide us on this journey?

The people at ANSTO deserve our respect and our gratitude. They make important contributions to Australia’s wellbeing every day, with little recognition, never mind understanding. This bill will enable them to do their job even better than before. It will ensure that their role and expertise are given the authority they need to ensure that Australia’s management of the risks and benefits of nuclear technology is second to none. I commend this bill to the House.

See this speech in context