Radioactive waste fight grows:
Muckaty plan a bad deal, not a done deal
Date: 14-Jun-2011
CANBERRA: The Australian Conservation Foundation has described as cynical and irresponsible the introduction to the Senate of recycled Howard-era legislation aimed at fast-tracking a nuclear waste dump in the Northern Territory.
The National Radioactive Waste Management Bill, which seeks to override state, territory and local government concerns and exempt the federal government from meeting key environmental and Aboriginal heritage rules, is to be introduced to the Senate today.
“This heavy-handed legislation is a cut-and-paste of a deeply unpopular Howard-era law – it is not a credible or mature basis for managing Australia’s radioactive waste,” said ACF Nuclear Free campaigner Dave Sweeney.
There is growing opposition, in the NT and beyond, to the federal dump planned for contested Aboriginal land at Muckaty, 120 kilometres north of Tennant Creek.
It is being challenged in the Federal Court by Traditional Owners of the region.
“Indigenous, development, public health, environment and faith groups, key unions and the NT Government all oppose energy minister Martin Ferguson’s waste dump plan,” Dave Sweeney said.
“Radioactive waste lasts a lot longer than a politician’s promise so we need to get its management right.
“This dump plan is a cynical attempt to find a short term political fix to a long term environmental and human health hazard.
“With key questions around consultation, consent and ownership currently before the Federal Court it is improper for Minister Ferguson to be trying to fast track this legislation, which is based on a false premise and a broken promise.
“The Muckaty plan is a bad deal, not a done deal – and it is set to become a household name and a major community campaign.”
Visit Martin Ferguson's Facebook page.
Visit Martin Ferguson's Facebook page.
For more reading
on what the dreadful Martin Ferguson
and the Australian Labor Party Government
are trying to do at Muckaty Station
No comments:
Post a Comment
This blog does not take Anonymous comments. Experience shows that comments cluttered with "Anonymous" are boring and people don't know whether "Anonymous" is one person or many. This is not a decision about freedom of speech. It is a decision about boring or unwillingness to be known by even a pseudonym.