On a Nuclear Free Victoria

Mr CARLI (Brunswick) — It is with great pleasure that I rise to speak on this bill. Having been an opponent of nuclear power in this state for many, many years, it is a great pleasure to support this bill, which will force a plebiscite if the commonwealth government ever thinks about putting a nuclear power plant in this state.


I remember the debate on the Nuclear Activities (Prohibition) Act of 1983 and marching through the streets of Melbourne in support of the government. We marched in support of the Cain government as it introduced the bill to prohibit nuclear activities in this state to make Victoria a nuclear free state. At the time I was working for the Brunswick Electricity Supply. We were doing a lot of things that are now very fashionable but were not very fashionable in 1983 — that is, looking at renewable energy and experimenting with some renewables. We now have the CERES park in Brunswick, which operates a whole series of renewables, from windmills to solar panels. In 1983 when I was working for the electricity supply we were planning that sort of activity. We were also doing demand management in people’s homes.

Certainly it is very fitting that the Bracks government is now continuing the work in terms of demand management and reducing our use of energy and is also looking at renewables and the potential for clean coal. What we need to provide in this state is clean energy, and we need to provide ample energy for our industry and households.
The issue of nuclear power in Victoria has received strong popular opposition. A recent poll undertaken by the Australia Institute indicates that Victoria has the largest number of people opposed to nuclear power plants.

It is not surprising that that is the case; Victoria has always been the centre of opposition to nuclear power and other nuclear activities. We now have a federal government that is considering the introduction of nuclear power in Australia. The Prime Minister has called for a robust debate, and there should be a robust debate. There is nothing more robust in a debate than the ability to vote and gauge people’s opinions. If we are going to have a robust debate, and if the federal government chooses to press ahead with nuclear power in the state of Victoria, the people should also be given an opportunity to vote. What this bill does is protect the people’s democratic rights and ensure that they have a say in whether there should be nuclear power in the state of Victoria.

The commonwealth government cannot simply ignore the views of the Victorian people on this issue. It involves a democratic principle, because we took a commitment to the last election. During the last election campaign we gave a commitment to the Victorian people that there would be a plebiscite in the event of the commonwealth’s acting to support or allow the construction of a nuclear facility in this state. Hence we have a mandate to implement this election commitment.


Plebiscites do not happen very often in this state, nor in any other state or the commonwealth. But this is important; it is an exceptional issue that has very deep roots in Victoria. For many decades there has been a very powerful anti nuclear movement in this state, and there is no doubt that the popular sentiment is opposed to a nuclear power plant. We have the situation in Victoria where the Bracks government is pressing on with renewable energy. We have supported and are still supporting the clean coal technology at the Hazelwood power station. I heard the member for Morwell talking a bit about that in the debate earlier, and I am pleased about his support of this very important demonstration technology in the Latrobe Valley. We have the demonstration of the large solar plant in north west Victoria. I understand it will be the largest solar plant in the southern hemisphere, if not the world. We also have a trial of carbon storage in the Otway Basin, the deployment of renewable energy throughout Victoria, and a renewable energy target for Victoria. That is all very important. We have had opposition to wind power and wind turbines from the Liberal Party in this chamber, and we have heard opposition from The Nationals as well. Yet wind turbines and wind power along with solar power and possibly geothermal energy are all renewables that have to be developed, and we need to ensure that they are exploited for the benefit of Victoria.


We are in a situation in Victoria where we believe, and certainly the polls tell us, that the overwhelming majority of Victorians do not support a nuclear power plant. The federal government has called for a robust debate on nuclear power — and so there should be. There should be a robust debate in which we consider the problems associated with the nuclear cycle and in dealing with nuclear waste, and the added risks created for an economy and a population in having to deal with nuclear waste and any associated potential accidents that could create problems that could last for not only some years but many hundreds of years.


The Bracks government believes in protecting the democratic rights of Victorians by putting into law the need for a plebiscite if the commonwealth government should choose to press ahead with building a nuclear power plant.
Some sites have been identified in Victoria. In the recent study undertaken on behalf of the federal government four sites were identified — at South Gippsland, Western Port, Port Phillip and Portland. They are all sites that were chosen because of the availability of sea water, because they are close to the national electricity market and network and to the major demand centres, they have suitable infrastructure, and they are buffered from major population areas.
They have been chosen as potential sites, and Victorians want their interests protected — and that is exactly what this plebiscite will do. It will protect the interests of all Victorians, but particularly those who live in areas around potential nuclear sites. It is very important that we support these rights.


We also have to look at nuclear power as an industry that may not be suitable for Australia. I certainly do not believe it is suitable for Victoria, and I do not believe it is suitable for Australia. It will cost considerably more to produce, and it is very hard to estimate the cost of nuclear power production because it depends on how you cost the treatment of the waste. Since we do not adequately treat the waste for the long term, we would have a potentially enormous liability in having a nuclear industry.
We would face the issue of the cost of its generation, and we would have the added risk of what to do about the nuclear waste. How would we treat it? Where would we leave it? In all the years that there have been debates about nuclear power, the issues involving disposal of nuclear waste have not been resolved.


The United States of America, under former President Jimmy Carter, decided that it would not treat spent nuclear rods, which are basically all left in storage, because there was a belief that if the reprocessing of the rods occurred and there was a greater production of plutonium, that plutonium could potentially be used for a dirty bomb. That is a real risk. As soon as you start developing the nuclear cycle, you have a risk that some of the materials — very small amounts, that is all you need — can be taken out of the cycle and used in acts of terrorism. That is a genuine risk; it was certainly a risk identified under the Jimmy Carter administration. I see no reason to make me believe that that risk has lessened in recent years — in fact, it has obviously increased in recent years.


Australia has to look very seriously at whether it wants to be part of a nuclear cycle. If it wants to take responsibility for not only the use of nuclear power but also the reprocessing of its waste, it has to concern itself with the treatment and use of plutonium, and it has to deal with various radioactive by products that emerge as waste out of the nuclear site. These are big issues which are not fully costed and for which we do not have a full technical resolution.
I believe the risk associated with nuclear power in this country is too great.

We certainly have alternatives in terms of renewables, but we also have alternatives of developing clean coal technology, which will create enormous possibilities for industries, for the electricity generation of Victoria and for the future prosperity of all Australians.