SAY NO TO A NUCLEAR AUSTRALIA

PM's Nuclear Plant Denial

12:25 PM, Wed 28 Feb 2007 .. Posted in Conspiracy Theories .. 6 comments .. Link

Printed in The Morning Bulletin, Rockhampton, 28th February 2006.
"PM's Nuclear Plant Denial
Canberra: Prime Minister John Howard says Melbourne businessman Ron Walker told him last year about his plan to start a nuclear energy company.
But Mr Howard denies that Mr Walker or fellow businessmen Hugh Morgan and Robert Champion de Crespigny- his associates at Australian Nuclear Energy Pty Ltd- had told him of any proposals for a nuclear power plant in Australia.
Newspapers yesterday reported that the three businessmen were examining the viability of setting up Australia's first nuclear power plant, in either Victoria or South Australia. Australian Nuclear Energy Pty Ltd has put out a short statement denying that any plans were underway.
"The government is not having any secret discussions," Mr Howard told parliament."

The following is an extract from The Herald Sun, 28th February 2006.
PM knew of nuclear plan.
"Mr Howard announced on May 31 last year his intention to commission an expert task force to look into the viability of nuclear power.
ANE was registered as a business on June 1, while the members of the Switkowski review were announced on June 6.
The Prime Minister denied any suggestion of inside information.
"The Government is not having any secret discussions," he said.
Labor's environment spokesman Peter Garrett said he was surprised plans to build a nuclear plant were so advanced.
"Australians are very clear that they don't want nuclear energy and nuclear power in this country," Mr Garrett said.
Victoria's Opposition Leader Ted Baillieu said a nuclear plant was unlikely to happen in Victoria.
"We have extraordinary energy reserves in Victoria, gas, coal and oil," Mr Baillieu said.
Most local state MPs around Western Port, a potential N-plant site, declared their opposition. Hastings Liberal MP Neale Burgess said he was totally opposed to nuclear power.
"I don't know why we would even consider it. We've just got so many other options," Mr Burgess said.
Mornington Liberal MP David Morris said it was out of the question.
But Bass Liberal MP Ken Smith said he had an open mind."

The following is an extract from The Age, 28th February 2006.
Walker told me about nuclear plans, says PM.
Mr Howard accused Mr Rudd of peddling conspiracy theories.
He said the Government would press ahead with the nuclear debate despite the political attacks from Labor and the Greens and jitters among his own MPs. "I am not ruling out power stations anywhere in this country," he said.
The company said in a statement it had not "put forward a proposal to build nuclear power plants in Australia."
The Age believes the businessmen looked at the feasibility of building reactors but decided not to proceed, given the long lead times in acquiring components and equipment.
However, Mr Morgan and Mr Champion de Crespigny did have discussions with Melbourne industrialist John White last year about his proposal for nuclear fuel leasing.
Mr White, who provided policy advice to the Government last year on uranium mining, is part of a group arguing the commercial case for nuclear fuel leasing, where uranium is mined, enriched, converted to fuel rods, then stored in Australia at a radioactive waste facility.

The following is an extract from The Sydney Morning Herald, 28th February 2006.
Businessmen deny nuclear proposal.
"The Government is not having any secret discussions," Mr Howard told Parliament.
The only contact I've had with these three very reputable businessmen is in about the middle of last year, Mr Walker in a telephone conversation I had with him ... he said that he and Hugh Morgan and Robert de Crespigny had decided to register a company that could be interested in nuclear power.
"And I said 'That's a great idea, Ron, you know my view on it.'
"My view and the view of the Government about nuclear being an option has been well known.
"The question of whether it ever goes any further will be a matter for commercial opinion."
Mr Howard said there was nothing conspiratorial about him speaking to Mr Walker, a former Liberal Party honorary treasurer and friend for the past 20 years.

I think that it bears mentioning that the Sydney Morning Herald and The Age are components of the Fairfax Media Group. Since Mr Walker is also the chairman of the Fairfax group, I must wonder how much of the truth we will be getting from these newspapers. The stories certainly seem to be suggesting a little favouritism on the whole nuclear idea. Co-incidence? I doubt it.

Co-incidentally, Mr Walker is not only a 'good friend of more than 20 years' to John Howard, but he was also 'National treasurer' to the Liberal Party from 1987 to 2002. Now, loathe is me to suggest that something crooked is going on here... but knowing Little Johnnie and his penchant for 'not being completely informed' within his own party... well... you can't blame me for wondering. In the stock market world this kind of association might suggest the practice of insider trading, and people could go to jail. In the world of government and big businesses, though, it seems to be par for the course. All you have to do is deny, deny, deny. Keep it up Johnnie, it just might work.

Leave a Comment

Hastings Nuclear & PoHC 0.5k Public Acquisition Overlays.

7:29 AM, Sat 17 Mar 2007 .. Posted by Matthew Ridgeway
The Port of Hastings Corporation, and its Land Use and Transport Strategy has extensive rail and road plans with Public Acquisition Overlays that are up to 500 metres wide. Why would you need such vast areas for tranports to a port? Maybe to carry dangerous goods, like uranium, spent nuclear fule rods and the like. I suppose you can not blame them for planning for soemthing like nuclear power, since The Australia Institute and the likes of Ron Walker, Hugh Morgan and Robert Champoind de Crespigny are talking nukes in Victoria and SA. Not only that, the National Australia Bank has put up its hand and said "We'll fund that!".

No, it is a very real threat, that the nukes are on the way down under. We must stop it at all cost!

An Instrduction

7:26 AM, Fri 23 Mar 2007 .. Posted by Anonymous
I applaud you for keeping an open mind. I also have a Blog on this topic. While we have come to different conclusions, I am also trying to listen to the issues, concerns and comments from both sides. You’ll notice I have links representing both on the Blog [fairly uncommon for this topic].

I have read your posts with interest and even tried to include some low “gobbledy-gook” info for you to consider.

Some links for you:
A study you may find interesting
http://nuclearaustralia.blogspot.com/2007/03/princeton-university-study-2004.html

My reference to, and comments about, your Blog
http://nuclearaustralia.blogspot.com/2007/03/anti-nuclear-blog-say-no-nuclear.html

My Blog in general
http://www.nuclearaustralia.blogspot.com/

I look forward to further discussions.

Hey ladies, can't you just do housework or cooking?

3:20 PM, Wed 9 May 2007 .. Posted by Ricky
Fuck you, if I want to mutate from radiation that is my perogative.
Mutation is a key component to evolution. What right do you have to hinder the evolutionary process?!

Interesting Idea...

12:02 PM, Wed 30 May 2007 .. Posted by tinacee
Ed... Wow, thanks for reading my blog... and thanks for the review. I'm glad to see that my point of discussion has made it across. Refreshing and inspiring though? I'm chuffed with that, let me tell you. However... there is something that I must clarify... I am very anti-nuclear. As I have said many times, I am not convinced. I do truly believe that it can only be a massive waste of time and expense. Sort of like a middle-man that we really don't need providing a service that we can perform ourselves at a much lower cost. It doesn't make sense to me.

And, just to reply to Ricky... If I want to smoke a cigarette in public, there are designated areas in which to do it. This is because it poses a danger to others. It's understandable that those who consciously make the decision not to smoke themselves don't want to be inadvertantly exposed to it in public. Therefore smokers are asked to respect non-smokers' wishes for smoke free air in many places. The same principal applies here, as far as I'm concerned. I don't want to be irradiated. And neither do my children. We're the non-smokers in this situation Ricky, and you are the smoker. Even if you really do want to glow (and/or mutate), you have no right to insist that the rest of us do too. Perhaps you could make it rich by designing a do-it-yourself radiation kit for all of those people who feel the same way that you do. They could take it home and set it up in their own bathrooms. How's this for an advertising slogan... "You too could be having tadpoles within 60 short days." It could be the idea that makes you a million, hmmm?

Why did you stop this blog?

2:42 PM, Wed 21 Nov 2007 .. Posted by Anonymous
Hey, for everybody who wants to follow up the nuclear issue until the elections, please visit www.votenuclearfree.net

I'm afraid of the idea to have 25 nuclear plants in Australia!

Still here

6:07 AM, Mon 10 Dec 2007 .. Posted by Ed
Hi Tina,

Still not convinced? I have to wonder what it would take to convince you. It seems as though most people come into the issue with a default anti-nuclear position. This is no surprise considering the related media attention given the issue over the years. Let's face it, nuclear reports tend to help sell papers.

Please consider a related post http://nuclearaustralia.blogspot.com/2007/11/media-and-nuclear-power.html

Or an interesting video here http://nuclearaustralia.blogspot.com/2007/10/gweneth-cravens-rip-anderson-video.html

It's easy for people to casually toss nuclear power aside. But at the same time, I think it's very dangerous in the broader sense - i.e. for the planet. Many turn to renewables for our collective salvation. I believe renewables do have a place in the battle to reduce emissions, but can not achieve the required results without nuclear. This is certainly true within Australia - whose hydro capacity seems to drop by the day.

No other country on earth - not one - has demonstrated the ability of any other renewable technology to displace fossil generation to the extent required to achieve the necessary goals. There is no technical evidence to suggest it will happen any time soon despite record investments in the technology. All I continue to see are claims from mostly academic reports about the theoretical possibilities of renewable. It these reports had even the slightest basis in reality, all the recent investment would be paying off, but it’s not, emissions continue to climb. See this post for more: http://nuclearaustralia.blogspot.com/2007/12/renewables-being-given-their-shot.html

Add to this the insane hypocrisy of adding more coal stations to the worst carbon emitter on earth, and I hope my point becomes a bit clearer. http://nuclearaustralia.blogspot.com/2007/11/kogan-creek-reality-of-australian.html

I am not convinced we are safe without nuclear.

{ Last Page } { Page 12 of 22 } { Next Page }

Do We Want This?

Here is a place where we
can discuss the current
nuclear power debate
in Australia.
A place to voice our
concerns and discuss
alternative sources.
The content of this blog
will periodically be sent
to our leaders in Canberra.
Please feel free to make
comment on the issues
raised for discussion here.
They need to know
just how we feel.

Interesting Reading

Greenpeace - Aust/Pacific
Greenpeace International - End the Nuclear Age
The Australian Wilderness Society
Nuclear Age Peace Foundation
CSIRO Energy Research
TreeHugger
Real Climate
Change.org
Green Options
Matter Network
AGO- Map of Renewable Energy Generators

SAY NO TO A NUCLEAR AUSTRALIA

PM's Nuclear Plant Denial

Hastings Nuclear & PoHC 0.5k Public Acquisition Overlays.

An Instrduction

Hey ladies, can't you just do housework or cooking?

Interesting Idea...

Why did you stop this blog?

Still here

Do We Want This?

Interesting Reading

Categories

Recent Entries