Nuking a debate

“I want an open and frank debate on nuclear energy in Australia.”

So said John Howard following a flurry of meetings with international politicians. Immediately preceding this statement, John Howard met with the American President and the new conservative Canadian Prime Minister. This triumvirate could effectively control the mining and processing of uranium in the international market.

However, it should be remembered that prior to these meetings John Howard also held discussions with the British and Indian Prime Ministers while he signed a trade and investment contract with the Chinese government. Condoleeza Rice did a whistle stop tour to provide visible US support and the dismantling of the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty that India had refused to sign.

In the meantime, domestic politics has seen our own Northern Territory senate support a nuclear storage facility in its own backyard. This has not gained popular support in the Northern Territory community, particularly one of the proposed sites, the town of Katherine. The CMFEU through its political spokesperson Martin Ferguson, would mine or cut down anything that “provides its members with employment.” Kim Beasley made a carefully worded statement to the ABC today where he ruled out “nuclear energy in Australia.” India and China, on the other hand, may provide good grounds for research and development?

We have also seen nuclear energy academics visiting Australia while John Howard controversially appointed a known nuclear energy advocate to head the Commonwealth’s main scientific body the CSIRO. So much for open scientific debate in Australia.

Let us now quickly examine the international politics. It may be said that India and Pakistan have their own ongoing nuclear arms race with Pakistan currently ahead. What guarantees can India provide now that it refuses to sign the treaty? China continues to give North Korea tacit approval in its quest to develop nuclear arms. Iran is another on George Bush’s Axis of Evil.

The political question now becomes, “What can provide safety controls to the West without the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty?” The answer appears to be the end to processing of uranium. John Howard has made statements to a similar effect.

However, this is only two thirds of the truth. The mining by Australia and Canada is the first stage of control. The processing of plutonium fuel rods through American and British technologies is the second stage of control. The third stage is the storage of spent plutonium in the safest geological region in the world being the Northern Territory.

Now there is an open and frank debate for all Australians to grasp.