❓ WA Premier Carpenter responds to concerns about the state becoming a nuclear waste dump, accusing the Liberal Party and federal government of opening the door to such a possibility.
AnsweredQoN 257Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
RADIOACTIVE WASTE
Will the Premier please outline to the house how a vote for the Western Australian Liberal Party would result in Western Australia becoming the world’s dumping ground for radioactive waste? Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr A.J. CARPENTER
Will the Premier please outline to the house how a vote for the Western Australian Liberal Party would result in Western Australia becoming the world’s dumping ground for radioactive waste? Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr A.J. CARPENTER
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for her question and for her interest in this issue. Mr T. Buswell : Did you read Paul Murray’s article? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I will come to him later. As Premier of Western Australia, I will not allow this state to become a nuclear waste dump. I do not think that anybody who thinks seriously about the issue would doubt that there is a movement happening that, unless we stand up to it, resist it and fight against it, will deliver us in that direction. We have heard from the opposition before about that prospect. We have heard it raised this week in the federal political domain by none other than the Acting Prime Minister. I listened with great interest this morning as the Prime Minister was asked in the United States whether he would rule out accepting nuclear waste. His response was, “There is nothing to rule out.” There is something to rule out. There is the very real prospect that Australia - we know that, given its political and geological stability, that probably means Western Australia - is being looked upon as a possible receival point for the world’s nuclear waste. Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: We cannot have that. This point has already been conceded by people on the other side of the argument: if we allow uranium to be mined in and exported out of Western Australia, we must face the prospect that in return we will take responsibility for receiving the waste from that industry. We have to face that prospect. Very senior members on the opposition benches have actually said that. Mark Vaile said it. One of the great philosophers of Liberal politics in Australia has said it - Wilson Tuckey. Mr C.J. Barnett : I thought you were talking about senior people. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The member for Cottesloe has conceded that point himself. We have to face that prospect. Wilson Tuckey has backed the move - An opposition member interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Let us hope so. As I said, Wilson Tuckey has backed the move, but in that process he took it to a completely new level. In his usual inimitable style and eagerness, the federal member for O’Connor seemed to be making an argument completely against uranium mining. I heard him on the radio, and I had to listen to it several times to make sure that it was not a comedy show that I was listening to and was the real thing: he said the following on radio 720 yesterday - I think it’s better that at every point of the production process you know exactly where the uranium is. I’d much prefer to have it delivered back at the end of its useful economic life than have some raving lunatic dictator send it by rocket. . . . I would be much more comfortable on account of my grandkids to know that none of it was going to come back in a rocket. Please remember, you don’t have to make a nuclear bomb to be able to utilise radioactive material to devastate a community - you can put it in an ordinary bomb . . . Realising where that public debate was going, the Prime Minister has attempted to play down that latest slip, but he has not done a successful job of doing so. He has very much left open the possibility that we could enter into some arrangement whereby we receive back the nuclear waste. Discussions are going on now with officials in the United States in that regard. It is absolutely clear cut, and anyone who refuses to see where this debate is going is blinding himself to the reality on all sorts of fronts. The commonwealth government has already indicated - I think it was the federal Treasurer - a preparedness to override the wishes of the state and to force uranium mining out of Western Australia. That has already been indicated. We can see the federal government’s general attitude towards states’ rights and responsibilities under the industrial relations legislation, which is currently being challenged in the High Court. Of course, I think it was last year that the commonwealth government was trying to impose upon South Australia - now I think it is doing the same with the Northern Territory - a decision to make it accept a nuclear waste storage facility in that state against its wishes. The commonwealth’s intent and attitude is quite clear. Western Australians, I think, understand the issue much more clearly than some of the people who comment on this matter give them credit for. Ordinary Western Australians understand where this matter is going. If the mining and export of uranium from Western Australia were allowed, the prospect would be hastened of this state becoming a receiver point for nuclear waste for the entire industry. There will come a time in the next couple of years when Western Australians will be able to make a choice whether they want that to happen. The policies of the Western Australian Liberal Party are taking us in that direction. That is a clear choice that people will be able to make for themselves.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: I thank the member for her question and for her interest in this issue. Mr T. Buswell : Did you read Paul Murray’s article? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I will come to him later. As Premier of Western Australia, I will not allow this state to become a nuclear waste dump. I do not think that anybody who thinks seriously about the issue would doubt that there is a movement happening that, unless we stand up to it, resist it and fight against it, will deliver us in that direction. We have heard from the opposition before about that prospect. We have heard it raised this week in the federal political domain by none other than the Acting Prime Minister. I listened with great interest this morning as the Prime Minister was asked in the United States whether he would rule out accepting nuclear waste. His response was, “There is nothing to rule out.” There is something to rule out. There is the very real prospect that Australia - we know that, given its political and geological stability, that probably means Western Australia - is being looked upon as a possible receival point for the world’s nuclear waste. Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: We cannot have that. This point has already been conceded by people on the other side of the argument: if we allow uranium to be mined in and exported out of Western Australia, we must face the prospect that in return we will take responsibility for receiving the waste from that industry. We have to face that prospect. Very senior members on the opposition benches have actually said that. Mark Vaile said it. One of the great philosophers of Liberal politics in Australia has said it - Wilson Tuckey. Mr C.J. Barnett : I thought you were talking about senior people. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The member for Cottesloe has conceded that point himself. We have to face that prospect. Wilson Tuckey has backed the move - An opposition member interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Let us hope so. As I said, Wilson Tuckey has backed the move, but in that process he took it to a completely new level. In his usual inimitable style and eagerness, the federal member for O’Connor seemed to be making an argument completely against uranium mining. I heard him on the radio, and I had to listen to it several times to make sure that it was not a comedy show that I was listening to and was the real thing: he said the following on radio 720 yesterday - I think it’s better that at every point of the production process you know exactly where the uranium is. I’d much prefer to have it delivered back at the end of its useful economic life than have some raving lunatic dictator send it by rocket. . . . I would be much more comfortable on account of my grandkids to know that none of it was going to come back in a rocket. Please remember, you don’t have to make a nuclear bomb to be able to utilise radioactive material to devastate a community - you can put it in an ordinary bomb . . . Realising where that public debate was going, the Prime Minister has attempted to play down that latest slip, but he has not done a successful job of doing so. He has very much left open the possibility that we could enter into some arrangement whereby we receive back the nuclear waste. Discussions are going on now with officials in the United States in that regard. It is absolutely clear cut, and anyone who refuses to see where this debate is going is blinding himself to the reality on all sorts of fronts. The commonwealth government has already indicated - I think it was the federal Treasurer - a preparedness to override the wishes of the state and to force uranium mining out of Western Australia. That has already been indicated. We can see the federal government’s general attitude towards states’ rights and responsibilities under the industrial relations legislation, which is currently being challenged in the High Court. Of course, I think it was last year that the commonwealth government was trying to impose upon South Australia - now I think it is doing the same with the Northern Territory - a decision to make it accept a nuclear waste storage facility in that state against its wishes. The commonwealth’s intent and attitude is quite clear. Western Australians, I think, understand the issue much more clearly than some of the people who comment on this matter give them credit for. Ordinary Western Australians understand where this matter is going. If the mining and export of uranium from Western Australia were allowed, the prospect would be hastened of this state becoming a receiver point for nuclear waste for the entire industry. There will come a time in the next couple of years when Western Australians will be able to make a choice whether they want that to happen. The policies of the Western Australian Liberal Party are taking us in that direction. That is a clear choice that people will be able to make for themselves.
The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: I thank the member for her question and for her interest in this issue. Mr T. Buswell : Did you read Paul Murray’s article? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I will come to him later. As Premier of Western Australia, I will not allow this state to become a nuclear waste dump. I do not think that anybody who thinks seriously about the issue would doubt that there is a movement happening that, unless we stand up to it, resist it and fight against it, will deliver us in that direction. We have heard from the opposition before about that prospect. We have heard it raised this week in the federal political domain by none other than the Acting Prime Minister. I listened with great interest this morning as the Prime Minister was asked in the United States whether he would rule out accepting nuclear waste. His response was, “There is nothing to rule out.” There is something to rule out. There is the very real prospect that Australia - we know that, given its political and geological stability, that probably means Western Australia - is being looked upon as a possible receival point for the world’s nuclear waste. Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: We cannot have that. This point has already been conceded by people on the other side of the argument: if we allow uranium to be mined in and exported out of Western Australia, we must face the prospect that in return we will take responsibility for receiving the waste from that industry. We have to face that prospect. Very senior members on the opposition benches have actually said that. Mark Vaile said it. One of the great philosophers of Liberal politics in Australia has said it - Wilson Tuckey. Mr C.J. Barnett : I thought you were talking about senior people. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The member for Cottesloe has conceded that point himself. We have to face that prospect. Wilson Tuckey has backed the move - An opposition member interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Let us hope so. As I said, Wilson Tuckey has backed the move, but in that process he took it to a completely new level. In his usual inimitable style and eagerness, the federal member for O’Connor seemed to be making an argument completely against uranium mining. I heard him on the radio, and I had to listen to it several times to make sure that it was not a comedy show that I was listening to and was the real thing: he said the following on radio 720 yesterday - I think it’s better that at every point of the production process you know exactly where the uranium is. I’d much prefer to have it delivered back at the end of its useful economic life than have some raving lunatic dictator send it by rocket. . . . I would be much more comfortable on account of my grandkids to know that none of it was going to come back in a rocket. Please remember, you don’t have to make a nuclear bomb to be able to utilise radioactive material to devastate a community - you can put it in an ordinary bomb . . . Realising where that public debate was going, the Prime Minister has attempted to play down that latest slip, but he has not done a successful job of doing so. He has very much left open the possibility that we could enter into some arrangement whereby we receive back the nuclear waste. Discussions are going on now with officials in the United States in that regard. It is absolutely clear cut, and anyone who refuses to see where this debate is going is blinding himself to the reality on all sorts of fronts. The commonwealth government has already indicated - I think it was the federal Treasurer - a preparedness to override the wishes of the state and to force uranium mining out of Western Australia. That has already been indicated. We can see the federal government’s general attitude towards states’ rights and responsibilities under the industrial relations legislation, which is currently being challenged in the High Court. Of course, I think it was last year that the commonwealth government was trying to impose upon South Australia - now I think it is doing the same with the Northern Territory - a decision to make it accept a nuclear waste storage facility in that state against its wishes. The commonwealth’s intent and attitude is quite clear. Western Australians, I think, understand the issue much more clearly than some of the people who comment on this matter give them credit for. Ordinary Western Australians understand where this matter is going. If the mining and export of uranium from Western Australia were allowed, the prospect would be hastened of this state becoming a receiver point for nuclear waste for the entire industry. There will come a time in the next couple of years when Western Australians will be able to make a choice whether they want that to happen. The policies of the Western Australian Liberal Party are taking us in that direction. That is a clear choice that people will be able to make for themselves.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: I thank the member for her question and for her interest in this issue. Mr T. Buswell : Did you read Paul Murray’s article? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I will come to him later. As Premier of Western Australia, I will not allow this state to become a nuclear waste dump. I do not think that anybody who thinks seriously about the issue would doubt that there is a movement happening that, unless we stand up to it, resist it and fight against it, will deliver us in that direction. We have heard from the opposition before about that prospect. We have heard it raised this week in the federal political domain by none other than the Acting Prime Minister. I listened with great interest this morning as the Prime Minister was asked in the United States whether he would rule out accepting nuclear waste. His response was, “There is nothing to rule out.” There is something to rule out. There is the very real prospect that Australia - we know that, given its political and geological stability, that probably means Western Australia - is being looked upon as a possible receival point for the world’s nuclear waste. Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: We cannot have that. This point has already been conceded by people on the other side of the argument: if we allow uranium to be mined in and exported out of Western Australia, we must face the prospect that in return we will take responsibility for receiving the waste from that industry. We have to face that prospect. Very senior members on the opposition benches have actually said that. Mark Vaile said it. One of the great philosophers of Liberal politics in Australia has said it - Wilson Tuckey. Mr C.J. Barnett : I thought you were talking about senior people. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The member for Cottesloe has conceded that point himself. We have to face that prospect. Wilson Tuckey has backed the move - An opposition member interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Let us hope so. As I said, Wilson Tuckey has backed the move, but in that process he took it to a completely new level. In his usual inimitable style and eagerness, the federal member for O’Connor seemed to be making an argument completely against uranium mining. I heard him on the radio, and I had to listen to it several times to make sure that it was not a comedy show that I was listening to and was the real thing: he said the following on radio 720 yesterday - I think it’s better that at every point of the production process you know exactly where the uranium is. I’d much prefer to have it delivered back at the end of its useful economic life than have some raving lunatic dictator send it by rocket. . . . I would be much more comfortable on account of my grandkids to know that none of it was going to come back in a rocket. Please remember, you don’t have to make a nuclear bomb to be able to utilise radioactive material to devastate a community - you can put it in an ordinary bomb . . . Realising where that public debate was going, the Prime Minister has attempted to play down that latest slip, but he has not done a successful job of doing so. He has very much left open the possibility that we could enter into some arrangement whereby we receive back the nuclear waste. Discussions are going on now with officials in the United States in that regard. It is absolutely clear cut, and anyone who refuses to see where this debate is going is blinding himself to the reality on all sorts of fronts. The commonwealth government has already indicated - I think it was the federal Treasurer - a preparedness to override the wishes of the state and to force uranium mining out of Western Australia. That has already been indicated. We can see the federal government’s general attitude towards states’ rights and responsibilities under the industrial relations legislation, which is currently being challenged in the High Court. Of course, I think it was last year that the commonwealth government was trying to impose upon South Australia - now I think it is doing the same with the Northern Territory - a decision to make it accept a nuclear waste storage facility in that state against its wishes. The commonwealth’s intent and attitude is quite clear. Western Australians, I think, understand the issue much more clearly than some of the people who comment on this matter give them credit for. Ordinary Western Australians understand where this matter is going. If the mining and export of uranium from Western Australia were allowed, the prospect would be hastened of this state becoming a receiver point for nuclear waste for the entire industry. There will come a time in the next couple of years when Western Australians will be able to make a choice whether they want that to happen. The policies of the Western Australian Liberal Party are taking us in that direction. That is a clear choice that people will be able to make for themselves.
I thank the member for her question and for her interest in this issue. Mr T. Buswell : Did you read Paul Murray’s article? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I will come to him later. As Premier of Western Australia, I will not allow this state to become a nuclear waste dump. I do not think that anybody who thinks seriously about the issue would doubt that there is a movement happening that, unless we stand up to it, resist it and fight against it, will deliver us in that direction. We have heard from the opposition before about that prospect. We have heard it raised this week in the federal political domain by none other than the Acting Prime Minister. I listened with great interest this morning as the Prime Minister was asked in the United States whether he would rule out accepting nuclear waste. His response was, “There is nothing to rule out.” There is something to rule out. There is the very real prospect that Australia - we know that, given its political and geological stability, that probably means Western Australia - is being looked upon as a possible receival point for the world’s nuclear waste. Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: We cannot have that. This point has already been conceded by people on the other side of the argument: if we allow uranium to be mined in and exported out of Western Australia, we must face the prospect that in return we will take responsibility for receiving the waste from that industry. We have to face that prospect. Very senior members on the opposition benches have actually said that. Mark Vaile said it. One of the great philosophers of Liberal politics in Australia has said it - Wilson Tuckey. Mr C.J. Barnett : I thought you were talking about senior people. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The member for Cottesloe has conceded that point himself. We have to face that prospect. Wilson Tuckey has backed the move - An opposition member interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Let us hope so. As I said, Wilson Tuckey has backed the move, but in that process he took it to a completely new level. In his usual inimitable style and eagerness, the federal member for O’Connor seemed to be making an argument completely against uranium mining. I heard him on the radio, and I had to listen to it several times to make sure that it was not a comedy show that I was listening to and was the real thing: he said the following on radio 720 yesterday - I think it’s better that at every point of the production process you know exactly where the uranium is. I’d much prefer to have it delivered back at the end of its useful economic life than have some raving lunatic dictator send it by rocket. . . . I would be much more comfortable on account of my grandkids to know that none of it was going to come back in a rocket. Please remember, you don’t have to make a nuclear bomb to be able to utilise radioactive material to devastate a community - you can put it in an ordinary bomb . . . Realising where that public debate was going, the Prime Minister has attempted to play down that latest slip, but he has not done a successful job of doing so. He has very much left open the possibility that we could enter into some arrangement whereby we receive back the nuclear waste. Discussions are going on now with officials in the United States in that regard. It is absolutely clear cut, and anyone who refuses to see where this debate is going is blinding himself to the reality on all sorts of fronts. The commonwealth government has already indicated - I think it was the federal Treasurer - a preparedness to override the wishes of the state and to force uranium mining out of Western Australia. That has already been indicated. We can see the federal government’s general attitude towards states’ rights and responsibilities under the industrial relations legislation, which is currently being challenged in the High Court. Of course, I think it was last year that the commonwealth government was trying to impose upon South Australia - now I think it is doing the same with the Northern Territory - a decision to make it accept a nuclear waste storage facility in that state against its wishes. The commonwealth’s intent and attitude is quite clear. Western Australians, I think, understand the issue much more clearly than some of the people who comment on this matter give them credit for. Ordinary Western Australians understand where this matter is going. If the mining and export of uranium from Western Australia were allowed, the prospect would be hastened of this state becoming a receiver point for nuclear waste for the entire industry. There will come a time in the next couple of years when Western Australians will be able to make a choice whether they want that to happen. The policies of the Western Australian Liberal Party are taking us in that direction. That is a clear choice that people will be able to make for themselves.
Mr T. Buswell : Did you read Paul Murray’s article? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I will come to him later. As Premier of Western Australia, I will not allow this state to become a nuclear waste dump. I do not think that anybody who thinks seriously about the issue would doubt that there is a movement happening that, unless we stand up to it, resist it and fight against it, will deliver us in that direction. We have heard from the opposition before about that prospect. We have heard it raised this week in the federal political domain by none other than the Acting Prime Minister. I listened with great interest this morning as the Prime Minister was asked in the United States whether he would rule out accepting nuclear waste. His response was, “There is nothing to rule out.” There is something to rule out. There is the very real prospect that Australia - we know that, given its political and geological stability, that probably means Western Australia - is being looked upon as a possible receival point for the world’s nuclear waste. Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: We cannot have that. This point has already been conceded by people on the other side of the argument: if we allow uranium to be mined in and exported out of Western Australia, we must face the prospect that in return we will take responsibility for receiving the waste from that industry. We have to face that prospect. Very senior members on the opposition benches have actually said that. Mark Vaile said it. One of the great philosophers of Liberal politics in Australia has said it - Wilson Tuckey. Mr C.J. Barnett : I thought you were talking about senior people. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The member for Cottesloe has conceded that point himself. We have to face that prospect. Wilson Tuckey has backed the move - An opposition member interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Let us hope so. As I said, Wilson Tuckey has backed the move, but in that process he took it to a completely new level. In his usual inimitable style and eagerness, the federal member for O’Connor seemed to be making an argument completely against uranium mining. I heard him on the radio, and I had to listen to it several times to make sure that it was not a comedy show that I was listening to and was the real thing: he said the following on radio 720 yesterday - I think it’s better that at every point of the production process you know exactly where the uranium is. I’d much prefer to have it delivered back at the end of its useful economic life than have some raving lunatic dictator send it by rocket. . . . I would be much more comfortable on account of my grandkids to know that none of it was going to come back in a rocket. Please remember, you don’t have to make a nuclear bomb to be able to utilise radioactive material to devastate a community - you can put it in an ordinary bomb . . . Realising where that public debate was going, the Prime Minister has attempted to play down that latest slip, but he has not done a successful job of doing so. He has very much left open the possibility that we could enter into some arrangement whereby we receive back the nuclear waste. Discussions are going on now with officials in the United States in that regard. It is absolutely clear cut, and anyone who refuses to see where this debate is going is blinding himself to the reality on all sorts of fronts. The commonwealth government has already indicated - I think it was the federal Treasurer - a preparedness to override the wishes of the state and to force uranium mining out of Western Australia. That has already been indicated. We can see the federal government’s general attitude towards states’ rights and responsibilities under the industrial relations legislation, which is currently being challenged in the High Court. Of course, I think it was last year that the commonwealth government was trying to impose upon South Australia - now I think it is doing the same with the Northern Territory - a decision to make it accept a nuclear waste storage facility in that state against its wishes. The commonwealth’s intent and attitude is quite clear. Western Australians, I think, understand the issue much more clearly than some of the people who comment on this matter give them credit for. Ordinary Western Australians understand where this matter is going. If the mining and export of uranium from Western Australia were allowed, the prospect would be hastened of this state becoming a receiver point for nuclear waste for the entire industry. There will come a time in the next couple of years when Western Australians will be able to make a choice whether they want that to happen. The policies of the Western Australian Liberal Party are taking us in that direction. That is a clear choice that people will be able to make for themselves.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I will come to him later. As Premier of Western Australia, I will not allow this state to become a nuclear waste dump. I do not think that anybody who thinks seriously about the issue would doubt that there is a movement happening that, unless we stand up to it, resist it and fight against it, will deliver us in that direction. We have heard from the opposition before about that prospect. We have heard it raised this week in the federal political domain by none other than the Acting Prime Minister. I listened with great interest this morning as the Prime Minister was asked in the United States whether he would rule out accepting nuclear waste. His response was, “There is nothing to rule out.” There is something to rule out. There is the very real prospect that Australia - we know that, given its political and geological stability, that probably means Western Australia - is being looked upon as a possible receival point for the world’s nuclear waste. Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: We cannot have that. This point has already been conceded by people on the other side of the argument: if we allow uranium to be mined in and exported out of Western Australia, we must face the prospect that in return we will take responsibility for receiving the waste from that industry. We have to face that prospect. Very senior members on the opposition benches have actually said that. Mark Vaile said it. One of the great philosophers of Liberal politics in Australia has said it - Wilson Tuckey. Mr C.J. Barnett : I thought you were talking about senior people. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The member for Cottesloe has conceded that point himself. We have to face that prospect. Wilson Tuckey has backed the move - An opposition member interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Let us hope so. As I said, Wilson Tuckey has backed the move, but in that process he took it to a completely new level. In his usual inimitable style and eagerness, the federal member for O’Connor seemed to be making an argument completely against uranium mining. I heard him on the radio, and I had to listen to it several times to make sure that it was not a comedy show that I was listening to and was the real thing: he said the following on radio 720 yesterday - I think it’s better that at every point of the production process you know exactly where the uranium is. I’d much prefer to have it delivered back at the end of its useful economic life than have some raving lunatic dictator send it by rocket. . . . I would be much more comfortable on account of my grandkids to know that none of it was going to come back in a rocket. Please remember, you don’t have to make a nuclear bomb to be able to utilise radioactive material to devastate a community - you can put it in an ordinary bomb . . . Realising where that public debate was going, the Prime Minister has attempted to play down that latest slip, but he has not done a successful job of doing so. He has very much left open the possibility that we could enter into some arrangement whereby we receive back the nuclear waste. Discussions are going on now with officials in the United States in that regard. It is absolutely clear cut, and anyone who refuses to see where this debate is going is blinding himself to the reality on all sorts of fronts. The commonwealth government has already indicated - I think it was the federal Treasurer - a preparedness to override the wishes of the state and to force uranium mining out of Western Australia. That has already been indicated. We can see the federal government’s general attitude towards states’ rights and responsibilities under the industrial relations legislation, which is currently being challenged in the High Court. Of course, I think it was last year that the commonwealth government was trying to impose upon South Australia - now I think it is doing the same with the Northern Territory - a decision to make it accept a nuclear waste storage facility in that state against its wishes. The commonwealth’s intent and attitude is quite clear. Western Australians, I think, understand the issue much more clearly than some of the people who comment on this matter give them credit for. Ordinary Western Australians understand where this matter is going. If the mining and export of uranium from Western Australia were allowed, the prospect would be hastened of this state becoming a receiver point for nuclear waste for the entire industry. There will come a time in the next couple of years when Western Australians will be able to make a choice whether they want that to happen. The policies of the Western Australian Liberal Party are taking us in that direction. That is a clear choice that people will be able to make for themselves.
Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: We cannot have that. This point has already been conceded by people on the other side of the argument: if we allow uranium to be mined in and exported out of Western Australia, we must face the prospect that in return we will take responsibility for receiving the waste from that industry. We have to face that prospect. Very senior members on the opposition benches have actually said that. Mark Vaile said it. One of the great philosophers of Liberal politics in Australia has said it - Wilson Tuckey. Mr C.J. Barnett : I thought you were talking about senior people. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The member for Cottesloe has conceded that point himself. We have to face that prospect. Wilson Tuckey has backed the move - An opposition member interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Let us hope so. As I said, Wilson Tuckey has backed the move, but in that process he took it to a completely new level. In his usual inimitable style and eagerness, the federal member for O’Connor seemed to be making an argument completely against uranium mining. I heard him on the radio, and I had to listen to it several times to make sure that it was not a comedy show that I was listening to and was the real thing: he said the following on radio 720 yesterday - I think it’s better that at every point of the production process you know exactly where the uranium is. I’d much prefer to have it delivered back at the end of its useful economic life than have some raving lunatic dictator send it by rocket. . . . I would be much more comfortable on account of my grandkids to know that none of it was going to come back in a rocket. Please remember, you don’t have to make a nuclear bomb to be able to utilise radioactive material to devastate a community - you can put it in an ordinary bomb . . . Realising where that public debate was going, the Prime Minister has attempted to play down that latest slip, but he has not done a successful job of doing so. He has very much left open the possibility that we could enter into some arrangement whereby we receive back the nuclear waste. Discussions are going on now with officials in the United States in that regard. It is absolutely clear cut, and anyone who refuses to see where this debate is going is blinding himself to the reality on all sorts of fronts. The commonwealth government has already indicated - I think it was the federal Treasurer - a preparedness to override the wishes of the state and to force uranium mining out of Western Australia. That has already been indicated. We can see the federal government’s general attitude towards states’ rights and responsibilities under the industrial relations legislation, which is currently being challenged in the High Court. Of course, I think it was last year that the commonwealth government was trying to impose upon South Australia - now I think it is doing the same with the Northern Territory - a decision to make it accept a nuclear waste storage facility in that state against its wishes. The commonwealth’s intent and attitude is quite clear. Western Australians, I think, understand the issue much more clearly than some of the people who comment on this matter give them credit for. Ordinary Western Australians understand where this matter is going. If the mining and export of uranium from Western Australia were allowed, the prospect would be hastened of this state becoming a receiver point for nuclear waste for the entire industry. There will come a time in the next couple of years when Western Australians will be able to make a choice whether they want that to happen. The policies of the Western Australian Liberal Party are taking us in that direction. That is a clear choice that people will be able to make for themselves.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER: We cannot have that. This point has already been conceded by people on the other side of the argument: if we allow uranium to be mined in and exported out of Western Australia, we must face the prospect that in return we will take responsibility for receiving the waste from that industry. We have to face that prospect. Very senior members on the opposition benches have actually said that. Mark Vaile said it. One of the great philosophers of Liberal politics in Australia has said it - Wilson Tuckey. Mr C.J. Barnett : I thought you were talking about senior people. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The member for Cottesloe has conceded that point himself. We have to face that prospect. Wilson Tuckey has backed the move - An opposition member interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Let us hope so. As I said, Wilson Tuckey has backed the move, but in that process he took it to a completely new level. In his usual inimitable style and eagerness, the federal member for O’Connor seemed to be making an argument completely against uranium mining. I heard him on the radio, and I had to listen to it several times to make sure that it was not a comedy show that I was listening to and was the real thing: he said the following on radio 720 yesterday - I think it’s better that at every point of the production process you know exactly where the uranium is. I’d much prefer to have it delivered back at the end of its useful economic life than have some raving lunatic dictator send it by rocket. . . . I would be much more comfortable on account of my grandkids to know that none of it was going to come back in a rocket. Please remember, you don’t have to make a nuclear bomb to be able to utilise radioactive material to devastate a community - you can put it in an ordinary bomb . . . Realising where that public debate was going, the Prime Minister has attempted to play down that latest slip, but he has not done a successful job of doing so. He has very much left open the possibility that we could enter into some arrangement whereby we receive back the nuclear waste. Discussions are going on now with officials in the United States in that regard. It is absolutely clear cut, and anyone who refuses to see where this debate is going is blinding himself to the reality on all sorts of fronts. The commonwealth government has already indicated - I think it was the federal Treasurer - a preparedness to override the wishes of the state and to force uranium mining out of Western Australia. That has already been indicated. We can see the federal government’s general attitude towards states’ rights and responsibilities under the industrial relations legislation, which is currently being challenged in the High Court. Of course, I think it was last year that the commonwealth government was trying to impose upon South Australia - now I think it is doing the same with the Northern Territory - a decision to make it accept a nuclear waste storage facility in that state against its wishes. The commonwealth’s intent and attitude is quite clear. Western Australians, I think, understand the issue much more clearly than some of the people who comment on this matter give them credit for. Ordinary Western Australians understand where this matter is going. If the mining and export of uranium from Western Australia were allowed, the prospect would be hastened of this state becoming a receiver point for nuclear waste for the entire industry. There will come a time in the next couple of years when Western Australians will be able to make a choice whether they want that to happen. The policies of the Western Australian Liberal Party are taking us in that direction. That is a clear choice that people will be able to make for themselves.
Mr C.J. Barnett : I thought you were talking about senior people. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The member for Cottesloe has conceded that point himself. We have to face that prospect. Wilson Tuckey has backed the move - An opposition member interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Let us hope so. As I said, Wilson Tuckey has backed the move, but in that process he took it to a completely new level. In his usual inimitable style and eagerness, the federal member for O’Connor seemed to be making an argument completely against uranium mining. I heard him on the radio, and I had to listen to it several times to make sure that it was not a comedy show that I was listening to and was the real thing: he said the following on radio 720 yesterday - I think it’s better that at every point of the production process you know exactly where the uranium is. I’d much prefer to have it delivered back at the end of its useful economic life than have some raving lunatic dictator send it by rocket. . . . I would be much more comfortable on account of my grandkids to know that none of it was going to come back in a rocket. Please remember, you don’t have to make a nuclear bomb to be able to utilise radioactive material to devastate a community - you can put it in an ordinary bomb . . . Realising where that public debate was going, the Prime Minister has attempted to play down that latest slip, but he has not done a successful job of doing so. He has very much left open the possibility that we could enter into some arrangement whereby we receive back the nuclear waste. Discussions are going on now with officials in the United States in that regard. It is absolutely clear cut, and anyone who refuses to see where this debate is going is blinding himself to the reality on all sorts of fronts. The commonwealth government has already indicated - I think it was the federal Treasurer - a preparedness to override the wishes of the state and to force uranium mining out of Western Australia. That has already been indicated. We can see the federal government’s general attitude towards states’ rights and responsibilities under the industrial relations legislation, which is currently being challenged in the High Court. Of course, I think it was last year that the commonwealth government was trying to impose upon South Australia - now I think it is doing the same with the Northern Territory - a decision to make it accept a nuclear waste storage facility in that state against its wishes. The commonwealth’s intent and attitude is quite clear. Western Australians, I think, understand the issue much more clearly than some of the people who comment on this matter give them credit for. Ordinary Western Australians understand where this matter is going. If the mining and export of uranium from Western Australia were allowed, the prospect would be hastened of this state becoming a receiver point for nuclear waste for the entire industry. There will come a time in the next couple of years when Western Australians will be able to make a choice whether they want that to happen. The policies of the Western Australian Liberal Party are taking us in that direction. That is a clear choice that people will be able to make for themselves.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The member for Cottesloe has conceded that point himself. We have to face that prospect. Wilson Tuckey has backed the move - An opposition member interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Let us hope so. As I said, Wilson Tuckey has backed the move, but in that process he took it to a completely new level. In his usual inimitable style and eagerness, the federal member for O’Connor seemed to be making an argument completely against uranium mining. I heard him on the radio, and I had to listen to it several times to make sure that it was not a comedy show that I was listening to and was the real thing: he said the following on radio 720 yesterday - I think it’s better that at every point of the production process you know exactly where the uranium is. I’d much prefer to have it delivered back at the end of its useful economic life than have some raving lunatic dictator send it by rocket. . . . I would be much more comfortable on account of my grandkids to know that none of it was going to come back in a rocket. Please remember, you don’t have to make a nuclear bomb to be able to utilise radioactive material to devastate a community - you can put it in an ordinary bomb . . . Realising where that public debate was going, the Prime Minister has attempted to play down that latest slip, but he has not done a successful job of doing so. He has very much left open the possibility that we could enter into some arrangement whereby we receive back the nuclear waste. Discussions are going on now with officials in the United States in that regard. It is absolutely clear cut, and anyone who refuses to see where this debate is going is blinding himself to the reality on all sorts of fronts. The commonwealth government has already indicated - I think it was the federal Treasurer - a preparedness to override the wishes of the state and to force uranium mining out of Western Australia. That has already been indicated. We can see the federal government’s general attitude towards states’ rights and responsibilities under the industrial relations legislation, which is currently being challenged in the High Court. Of course, I think it was last year that the commonwealth government was trying to impose upon South Australia - now I think it is doing the same with the Northern Territory - a decision to make it accept a nuclear waste storage facility in that state against its wishes. The commonwealth’s intent and attitude is quite clear. Western Australians, I think, understand the issue much more clearly than some of the people who comment on this matter give them credit for. Ordinary Western Australians understand where this matter is going. If the mining and export of uranium from Western Australia were allowed, the prospect would be hastened of this state becoming a receiver point for nuclear waste for the entire industry. There will come a time in the next couple of years when Western Australians will be able to make a choice whether they want that to happen. The policies of the Western Australian Liberal Party are taking us in that direction. That is a clear choice that people will be able to make for themselves.
An opposition member interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Let us hope so. As I said, Wilson Tuckey has backed the move, but in that process he took it to a completely new level. In his usual inimitable style and eagerness, the federal member for O’Connor seemed to be making an argument completely against uranium mining. I heard him on the radio, and I had to listen to it several times to make sure that it was not a comedy show that I was listening to and was the real thing: he said the following on radio 720 yesterday - I think it’s better that at every point of the production process you know exactly where the uranium is. I’d much prefer to have it delivered back at the end of its useful economic life than have some raving lunatic dictator send it by rocket. . . . I would be much more comfortable on account of my grandkids to know that none of it was going to come back in a rocket. Please remember, you don’t have to make a nuclear bomb to be able to utilise radioactive material to devastate a community - you can put it in an ordinary bomb . . . Realising where that public debate was going, the Prime Minister has attempted to play down that latest slip, but he has not done a successful job of doing so. He has very much left open the possibility that we could enter into some arrangement whereby we receive back the nuclear waste. Discussions are going on now with officials in the United States in that regard. It is absolutely clear cut, and anyone who refuses to see where this debate is going is blinding himself to the reality on all sorts of fronts. The commonwealth government has already indicated - I think it was the federal Treasurer - a preparedness to override the wishes of the state and to force uranium mining out of Western Australia. That has already been indicated. We can see the federal government’s general attitude towards states’ rights and responsibilities under the industrial relations legislation, which is currently being challenged in the High Court. Of course, I think it was last year that the commonwealth government was trying to impose upon South Australia - now I think it is doing the same with the Northern Territory - a decision to make it accept a nuclear waste storage facility in that state against its wishes. The commonwealth’s intent and attitude is quite clear. Western Australians, I think, understand the issue much more clearly than some of the people who comment on this matter give them credit for. Ordinary Western Australians understand where this matter is going. If the mining and export of uranium from Western Australia were allowed, the prospect would be hastened of this state becoming a receiver point for nuclear waste for the entire industry. There will come a time in the next couple of years when Western Australians will be able to make a choice whether they want that to happen. The policies of the Western Australian Liberal Party are taking us in that direction. That is a clear choice that people will be able to make for themselves.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Let us hope so. As I said, Wilson Tuckey has backed the move, but in that process he took it to a completely new level. In his usual inimitable style and eagerness, the federal member for O’Connor seemed to be making an argument completely against uranium mining. I heard him on the radio, and I had to listen to it several times to make sure that it was not a comedy show that I was listening to and was the real thing: he said the following on radio 720 yesterday - I think it’s better that at every point of the production process you know exactly where the uranium is. I’d much prefer to have it delivered back at the end of its useful economic life than have some raving lunatic dictator send it by rocket. . . . I would be much more comfortable on account of my grandkids to know that none of it was going to come back in a rocket. Please remember, you don’t have to make a nuclear bomb to be able to utilise radioactive material to devastate a community - you can put it in an ordinary bomb . . . Realising where that public debate was going, the Prime Minister has attempted to play down that latest slip, but he has not done a successful job of doing so. He has very much left open the possibility that we could enter into some arrangement whereby we receive back the nuclear waste. Discussions are going on now with officials in the United States in that regard. It is absolutely clear cut, and anyone who refuses to see where this debate is going is blinding himself to the reality on all sorts of fronts. The commonwealth government has already indicated - I think it was the federal Treasurer - a preparedness to override the wishes of the state and to force uranium mining out of Western Australia. That has already been indicated. We can see the federal government’s general attitude towards states’ rights and responsibilities under the industrial relations legislation, which is currently being challenged in the High Court. Of course, I think it was last year that the commonwealth government was trying to impose upon South Australia - now I think it is doing the same with the Northern Territory - a decision to make it accept a nuclear waste storage facility in that state against its wishes. The commonwealth’s intent and attitude is quite clear. Western Australians, I think, understand the issue much more clearly than some of the people who comment on this matter give them credit for. Ordinary Western Australians understand where this matter is going. If the mining and export of uranium from Western Australia were allowed, the prospect would be hastened of this state becoming a receiver point for nuclear waste for the entire industry. There will come a time in the next couple of years when Western Australians will be able to make a choice whether they want that to happen. The policies of the Western Australian Liberal Party are taking us in that direction. That is a clear choice that people will be able to make for themselves.
I think it’s better that at every point of the production process you know exactly where the uranium is. I’d much prefer to have it delivered back at the end of its useful economic life than have some raving lunatic dictator send it by rocket. . . . I would be much more comfortable on account of my grandkids to know that none of it was going to come back in a rocket. Please remember, you don’t have to make a nuclear bomb to be able to utilise radioactive material to devastate a community - you can put it in an ordinary bomb . . . Realising where that public debate was going, the Prime Minister has attempted to play down that latest slip, but he has not done a successful job of doing so. He has very much left open the possibility that we could enter into some arrangement whereby we receive back the nuclear waste. Discussions are going on now with officials in the United States in that regard. It is absolutely clear cut, and anyone who refuses to see where this debate is going is blinding himself to the reality on all sorts of fronts. The commonwealth government has already indicated - I think it was the federal Treasurer - a preparedness to override the wishes of the state and to force uranium mining out of Western Australia. That has already been indicated. We can see the federal government’s general attitude towards states’ rights and responsibilities under the industrial relations legislation, which is currently being challenged in the High Court. Of course, I think it was last year that the commonwealth government was trying to impose upon South Australia - now I think it is doing the same with the Northern Territory - a decision to make it accept a nuclear waste storage facility in that state against its wishes. The commonwealth’s intent and attitude is quite clear. Western Australians, I think, understand the issue much more clearly than some of the people who comment on this matter give them credit for. Ordinary Western Australians understand where this matter is going. If the mining and export of uranium from Western Australia were allowed, the prospect would be hastened of this state becoming a receiver point for nuclear waste for the entire industry. There will come a time in the next couple of years when Western Australians will be able to make a choice whether they want that to happen. The policies of the Western Australian Liberal Party are taking us in that direction. That is a clear choice that people will be able to make for themselves.
. . . I would be much more comfortable on account of my grandkids to know that none of it was going to come back in a rocket. Please remember, you don’t have to make a nuclear bomb to be able to utilise radioactive material to devastate a community - you can put it in an ordinary bomb . . . Realising where that public debate was going, the Prime Minister has attempted to play down that latest slip, but he has not done a successful job of doing so. He has very much left open the possibility that we could enter into some arrangement whereby we receive back the nuclear waste. Discussions are going on now with officials in the United States in that regard. It is absolutely clear cut, and anyone who refuses to see where this debate is going is blinding himself to the reality on all sorts of fronts. The commonwealth government has already indicated - I think it was the federal Treasurer - a preparedness to override the wishes of the state and to force uranium mining out of Western Australia. That has already been indicated. We can see the federal government’s general attitude towards states’ rights and responsibilities under the industrial relations legislation, which is currently being challenged in the High Court. Of course, I think it was last year that the commonwealth government was trying to impose upon South Australia - now I think it is doing the same with the Northern Territory - a decision to make it accept a nuclear waste storage facility in that state against its wishes. The commonwealth’s intent and attitude is quite clear. Western Australians, I think, understand the issue much more clearly than some of the people who comment on this matter give them credit for. Ordinary Western Australians understand where this matter is going. If the mining and export of uranium from Western Australia were allowed, the prospect would be hastened of this state becoming a receiver point for nuclear waste for the entire industry. There will come a time in the next couple of years when Western Australians will be able to make a choice whether they want that to happen. The policies of the Western Australian Liberal Party are taking us in that direction. That is a clear choice that people will be able to make for themselves.
I would be much more comfortable on account of my grandkids to know that none of it was going to come back in a rocket. Please remember, you don’t have to make a nuclear bomb to be able to utilise radioactive material to devastate a community - you can put it in an ordinary bomb . . . Realising where that public debate was going, the Prime Minister has attempted to play down that latest slip, but he has not done a successful job of doing so. He has very much left open the possibility that we could enter into some arrangement whereby we receive back the nuclear waste. Discussions are going on now with officials in the United States in that regard. It is absolutely clear cut, and anyone who refuses to see where this debate is going is blinding himself to the reality on all sorts of fronts. The commonwealth government has already indicated - I think it was the federal Treasurer - a preparedness to override the wishes of the state and to force uranium mining out of Western Australia. That has already been indicated. We can see the federal government’s general attitude towards states’ rights and responsibilities under the industrial relations legislation, which is currently being challenged in the High Court. Of course, I think it was last year that the commonwealth government was trying to impose upon South Australia - now I think it is doing the same with the Northern Territory - a decision to make it accept a nuclear waste storage facility in that state against its wishes. The commonwealth’s intent and attitude is quite clear. Western Australians, I think, understand the issue much more clearly than some of the people who comment on this matter give them credit for. Ordinary Western Australians understand where this matter is going. If the mining and export of uranium from Western Australia were allowed, the prospect would be hastened of this state becoming a receiver point for nuclear waste for the entire industry. There will come a time in the next couple of years when Western Australians will be able to make a choice whether they want that to happen. The policies of the Western Australian Liberal Party are taking us in that direction. That is a clear choice that people will be able to make for themselves.
Realising where that public debate was going, the Prime Minister has attempted to play down that latest slip, but he has not done a successful job of doing so. He has very much left open the possibility that we could enter into some arrangement whereby we receive back the nuclear waste. Discussions are going on now with officials in the United States in that regard. It is absolutely clear cut, and anyone who refuses to see where this debate is going is blinding himself to the reality on all sorts of fronts. The commonwealth government has already indicated - I think it was the federal Treasurer - a preparedness to override the wishes of the state and to force uranium mining out of Western Australia. That has already been indicated. We can see the federal government’s general attitude towards states’ rights and responsibilities under the industrial relations legislation, which is currently being challenged in the High Court. Of course, I think it was last year that the commonwealth government was trying to impose upon South Australia - now I think it is doing the same with the Northern Territory - a decision to make it accept a nuclear waste storage facility in that state against its wishes. The commonwealth’s intent and attitude is quite clear. Western Australians, I think, understand the issue much more clearly than some of the people who comment on this matter give them credit for. Ordinary Western Australians understand where this matter is going. If the mining and export of uranium from Western Australia were allowed, the prospect would be hastened of this state becoming a receiver point for nuclear waste for the entire industry. There will come a time in the next couple of years when Western Australians will be able to make a choice whether they want that to happen. The policies of the Western Australian Liberal Party are taking us in that direction. That is a clear choice that people will be able to make for themselves.
Western Australians, I think, understand the issue much more clearly than some of the people who comment on this matter give them credit for. Ordinary Western Australians understand where this matter is going. If the mining and export of uranium from Western Australia were allowed, the prospect would be hastened of this state becoming a receiver point for nuclear waste for the entire industry. There will come a time in the next couple of years when Western Australians will be able to make a choice whether they want that to happen. The policies of the Western Australian Liberal Party are taking us in that direction. That is a clear choice that people will be able to make for themselves.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: I thank the member for her question and for her interest in this issue. Mr T. Buswell : Did you read Paul Murray’s article? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I will come to him later. As Premier of Western Australia, I will not allow this state to become a nuclear waste dump. I do not think that anybody who thinks seriously about the issue would doubt that there is a movement happening that, unless we stand up to it, resist it and fight against it, will deliver us in that direction. We have heard from the opposition before about that prospect. We have heard it raised this week in the federal political domain by none other than the Acting Prime Minister. I listened with great interest this morning as the Prime Minister was asked in the United States whether he would rule out accepting nuclear waste. His response was, “There is nothing to rule out.” There is something to rule out. There is the very real prospect that Australia - we know that, given its political and geological stability, that probably means Western Australia - is being looked upon as a possible receival point for the world’s nuclear waste. Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: We cannot have that. This point has already been conceded by people on the other side of the argument: if we allow uranium to be mined in and exported out of Western Australia, we must face the prospect that in return we will take responsibility for receiving the waste from that industry. We have to face that prospect. Very senior members on the opposition benches have actually said that. Mark Vaile said it. One of the great philosophers of Liberal politics in Australia has said it - Wilson Tuckey. Mr C.J. Barnett : I thought you were talking about senior people. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The member for Cottesloe has conceded that point himself. We have to face that prospect. Wilson Tuckey has backed the move - An opposition member interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Let us hope so. As I said, Wilson Tuckey has backed the move, but in that process he took it to a completely new level. In his usual inimitable style and eagerness, the federal member for O’Connor seemed to be making an argument completely against uranium mining. I heard him on the radio, and I had to listen to it several times to make sure that it was not a comedy show that I was listening to and was the real thing: he said the following on radio 720 yesterday - I think it’s better that at every point of the production process you know exactly where the uranium is. I’d much prefer to have it delivered back at the end of its useful economic life than have some raving lunatic dictator send it by rocket. . . . I would be much more comfortable on account of my grandkids to know that none of it was going to come back in a rocket. Please remember, you don’t have to make a nuclear bomb to be able to utilise radioactive material to devastate a community - you can put it in an ordinary bomb . . . Realising where that public debate was going, the Prime Minister has attempted to play down that latest slip, but he has not done a successful job of doing so. He has very much left open the possibility that we could enter into some arrangement whereby we receive back the nuclear waste. Discussions are going on now with officials in the United States in that regard. It is absolutely clear cut, and anyone who refuses to see where this debate is going is blinding himself to the reality on all sorts of fronts. The commonwealth government has already indicated - I think it was the federal Treasurer - a preparedness to override the wishes of the state and to force uranium mining out of Western Australia. That has already been indicated. We can see the federal government’s general attitude towards states’ rights and responsibilities under the industrial relations legislation, which is currently being challenged in the High Court. Of course, I think it was last year that the commonwealth government was trying to impose upon South Australia - now I think it is doing the same with the Northern Territory - a decision to make it accept a nuclear waste storage facility in that state against its wishes. The commonwealth’s intent and attitude is quite clear. Western Australians, I think, understand the issue much more clearly than some of the people who comment on this matter give them credit for. Ordinary Western Australians understand where this matter is going. If the mining and export of uranium from Western Australia were allowed, the prospect would be hastened of this state becoming a receiver point for nuclear waste for the entire industry. There will come a time in the next couple of years when Western Australians will be able to make a choice whether they want that to happen. The policies of the Western Australian Liberal Party are taking us in that direction. That is a clear choice that people will be able to make for themselves.
The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: I thank the member for her question and for her interest in this issue. Mr T. Buswell : Did you read Paul Murray’s article? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I will come to him later. As Premier of Western Australia, I will not allow this state to become a nuclear waste dump. I do not think that anybody who thinks seriously about the issue would doubt that there is a movement happening that, unless we stand up to it, resist it and fight against it, will deliver us in that direction. We have heard from the opposition before about that prospect. We have heard it raised this week in the federal political domain by none other than the Acting Prime Minister. I listened with great interest this morning as the Prime Minister was asked in the United States whether he would rule out accepting nuclear waste. His response was, “There is nothing to rule out.” There is something to rule out. There is the very real prospect that Australia - we know that, given its political and geological stability, that probably means Western Australia - is being looked upon as a possible receival point for the world’s nuclear waste. Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: We cannot have that. This point has already been conceded by people on the other side of the argument: if we allow uranium to be mined in and exported out of Western Australia, we must face the prospect that in return we will take responsibility for receiving the waste from that industry. We have to face that prospect. Very senior members on the opposition benches have actually said that. Mark Vaile said it. One of the great philosophers of Liberal politics in Australia has said it - Wilson Tuckey. Mr C.J. Barnett : I thought you were talking about senior people. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The member for Cottesloe has conceded that point himself. We have to face that prospect. Wilson Tuckey has backed the move - An opposition member interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Let us hope so. As I said, Wilson Tuckey has backed the move, but in that process he took it to a completely new level. In his usual inimitable style and eagerness, the federal member for O’Connor seemed to be making an argument completely against uranium mining. I heard him on the radio, and I had to listen to it several times to make sure that it was not a comedy show that I was listening to and was the real thing: he said the following on radio 720 yesterday - I think it’s better that at every point of the production process you know exactly where the uranium is. I’d much prefer to have it delivered back at the end of its useful economic life than have some raving lunatic dictator send it by rocket. . . . I would be much more comfortable on account of my grandkids to know that none of it was going to come back in a rocket. Please remember, you don’t have to make a nuclear bomb to be able to utilise radioactive material to devastate a community - you can put it in an ordinary bomb . . . Realising where that public debate was going, the Prime Minister has attempted to play down that latest slip, but he has not done a successful job of doing so. He has very much left open the possibility that we could enter into some arrangement whereby we receive back the nuclear waste. Discussions are going on now with officials in the United States in that regard. It is absolutely clear cut, and anyone who refuses to see where this debate is going is blinding himself to the reality on all sorts of fronts. The commonwealth government has already indicated - I think it was the federal Treasurer - a preparedness to override the wishes of the state and to force uranium mining out of Western Australia. That has already been indicated. We can see the federal government’s general attitude towards states’ rights and responsibilities under the industrial relations legislation, which is currently being challenged in the High Court. Of course, I think it was last year that the commonwealth government was trying to impose upon South Australia - now I think it is doing the same with the Northern Territory - a decision to make it accept a nuclear waste storage facility in that state against its wishes. The commonwealth’s intent and attitude is quite clear. Western Australians, I think, understand the issue much more clearly than some of the people who comment on this matter give them credit for. Ordinary Western Australians understand where this matter is going. If the mining and export of uranium from Western Australia were allowed, the prospect would be hastened of this state becoming a receiver point for nuclear waste for the entire industry. There will come a time in the next couple of years when Western Australians will be able to make a choice whether they want that to happen. The policies of the Western Australian Liberal Party are taking us in that direction. That is a clear choice that people will be able to make for themselves.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: I thank the member for her question and for her interest in this issue. Mr T. Buswell : Did you read Paul Murray’s article? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I will come to him later. As Premier of Western Australia, I will not allow this state to become a nuclear waste dump. I do not think that anybody who thinks seriously about the issue would doubt that there is a movement happening that, unless we stand up to it, resist it and fight against it, will deliver us in that direction. We have heard from the opposition before about that prospect. We have heard it raised this week in the federal political domain by none other than the Acting Prime Minister. I listened with great interest this morning as the Prime Minister was asked in the United States whether he would rule out accepting nuclear waste. His response was, “There is nothing to rule out.” There is something to rule out. There is the very real prospect that Australia - we know that, given its political and geological stability, that probably means Western Australia - is being looked upon as a possible receival point for the world’s nuclear waste. Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: We cannot have that. This point has already been conceded by people on the other side of the argument: if we allow uranium to be mined in and exported out of Western Australia, we must face the prospect that in return we will take responsibility for receiving the waste from that industry. We have to face that prospect. Very senior members on the opposition benches have actually said that. Mark Vaile said it. One of the great philosophers of Liberal politics in Australia has said it - Wilson Tuckey. Mr C.J. Barnett : I thought you were talking about senior people. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The member for Cottesloe has conceded that point himself. We have to face that prospect. Wilson Tuckey has backed the move - An opposition member interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Let us hope so. As I said, Wilson Tuckey has backed the move, but in that process he took it to a completely new level. In his usual inimitable style and eagerness, the federal member for O’Connor seemed to be making an argument completely against uranium mining. I heard him on the radio, and I had to listen to it several times to make sure that it was not a comedy show that I was listening to and was the real thing: he said the following on radio 720 yesterday - I think it’s better that at every point of the production process you know exactly where the uranium is. I’d much prefer to have it delivered back at the end of its useful economic life than have some raving lunatic dictator send it by rocket. . . . I would be much more comfortable on account of my grandkids to know that none of it was going to come back in a rocket. Please remember, you don’t have to make a nuclear bomb to be able to utilise radioactive material to devastate a community - you can put it in an ordinary bomb . . . Realising where that public debate was going, the Prime Minister has attempted to play down that latest slip, but he has not done a successful job of doing so. He has very much left open the possibility that we could enter into some arrangement whereby we receive back the nuclear waste. Discussions are going on now with officials in the United States in that regard. It is absolutely clear cut, and anyone who refuses to see where this debate is going is blinding himself to the reality on all sorts of fronts. The commonwealth government has already indicated - I think it was the federal Treasurer - a preparedness to override the wishes of the state and to force uranium mining out of Western Australia. That has already been indicated. We can see the federal government’s general attitude towards states’ rights and responsibilities under the industrial relations legislation, which is currently being challenged in the High Court. Of course, I think it was last year that the commonwealth government was trying to impose upon South Australia - now I think it is doing the same with the Northern Territory - a decision to make it accept a nuclear waste storage facility in that state against its wishes. The commonwealth’s intent and attitude is quite clear. Western Australians, I think, understand the issue much more clearly than some of the people who comment on this matter give them credit for. Ordinary Western Australians understand where this matter is going. If the mining and export of uranium from Western Australia were allowed, the prospect would be hastened of this state becoming a receiver point for nuclear waste for the entire industry. There will come a time in the next couple of years when Western Australians will be able to make a choice whether they want that to happen. The policies of the Western Australian Liberal Party are taking us in that direction. That is a clear choice that people will be able to make for themselves.
I thank the member for her question and for her interest in this issue. Mr T. Buswell : Did you read Paul Murray’s article? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I will come to him later. As Premier of Western Australia, I will not allow this state to become a nuclear waste dump. I do not think that anybody who thinks seriously about the issue would doubt that there is a movement happening that, unless we stand up to it, resist it and fight against it, will deliver us in that direction. We have heard from the opposition before about that prospect. We have heard it raised this week in the federal political domain by none other than the Acting Prime Minister. I listened with great interest this morning as the Prime Minister was asked in the United States whether he would rule out accepting nuclear waste. His response was, “There is nothing to rule out.” There is something to rule out. There is the very real prospect that Australia - we know that, given its political and geological stability, that probably means Western Australia - is being looked upon as a possible receival point for the world’s nuclear waste. Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: We cannot have that. This point has already been conceded by people on the other side of the argument: if we allow uranium to be mined in and exported out of Western Australia, we must face the prospect that in return we will take responsibility for receiving the waste from that industry. We have to face that prospect. Very senior members on the opposition benches have actually said that. Mark Vaile said it. One of the great philosophers of Liberal politics in Australia has said it - Wilson Tuckey. Mr C.J. Barnett : I thought you were talking about senior people. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The member for Cottesloe has conceded that point himself. We have to face that prospect. Wilson Tuckey has backed the move - An opposition member interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Let us hope so. As I said, Wilson Tuckey has backed the move, but in that process he took it to a completely new level. In his usual inimitable style and eagerness, the federal member for O’Connor seemed to be making an argument completely against uranium mining. I heard him on the radio, and I had to listen to it several times to make sure that it was not a comedy show that I was listening to and was the real thing: he said the following on radio 720 yesterday - I think it’s better that at every point of the production process you know exactly where the uranium is. I’d much prefer to have it delivered back at the end of its useful economic life than have some raving lunatic dictator send it by rocket. . . . I would be much more comfortable on account of my grandkids to know that none of it was going to come back in a rocket. Please remember, you don’t have to make a nuclear bomb to be able to utilise radioactive material to devastate a community - you can put it in an ordinary bomb . . . Realising where that public debate was going, the Prime Minister has attempted to play down that latest slip, but he has not done a successful job of doing so. He has very much left open the possibility that we could enter into some arrangement whereby we receive back the nuclear waste. Discussions are going on now with officials in the United States in that regard. It is absolutely clear cut, and anyone who refuses to see where this debate is going is blinding himself to the reality on all sorts of fronts. The commonwealth government has already indicated - I think it was the federal Treasurer - a preparedness to override the wishes of the state and to force uranium mining out of Western Australia. That has already been indicated. We can see the federal government’s general attitude towards states’ rights and responsibilities under the industrial relations legislation, which is currently being challenged in the High Court. Of course, I think it was last year that the commonwealth government was trying to impose upon South Australia - now I think it is doing the same with the Northern Territory - a decision to make it accept a nuclear waste storage facility in that state against its wishes. The commonwealth’s intent and attitude is quite clear. Western Australians, I think, understand the issue much more clearly than some of the people who comment on this matter give them credit for. Ordinary Western Australians understand where this matter is going. If the mining and export of uranium from Western Australia were allowed, the prospect would be hastened of this state becoming a receiver point for nuclear waste for the entire industry. There will come a time in the next couple of years when Western Australians will be able to make a choice whether they want that to happen. The policies of the Western Australian Liberal Party are taking us in that direction. That is a clear choice that people will be able to make for themselves.
Mr T. Buswell : Did you read Paul Murray’s article? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I will come to him later. As Premier of Western Australia, I will not allow this state to become a nuclear waste dump. I do not think that anybody who thinks seriously about the issue would doubt that there is a movement happening that, unless we stand up to it, resist it and fight against it, will deliver us in that direction. We have heard from the opposition before about that prospect. We have heard it raised this week in the federal political domain by none other than the Acting Prime Minister. I listened with great interest this morning as the Prime Minister was asked in the United States whether he would rule out accepting nuclear waste. His response was, “There is nothing to rule out.” There is something to rule out. There is the very real prospect that Australia - we know that, given its political and geological stability, that probably means Western Australia - is being looked upon as a possible receival point for the world’s nuclear waste. Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: We cannot have that. This point has already been conceded by people on the other side of the argument: if we allow uranium to be mined in and exported out of Western Australia, we must face the prospect that in return we will take responsibility for receiving the waste from that industry. We have to face that prospect. Very senior members on the opposition benches have actually said that. Mark Vaile said it. One of the great philosophers of Liberal politics in Australia has said it - Wilson Tuckey. Mr C.J. Barnett : I thought you were talking about senior people. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The member for Cottesloe has conceded that point himself. We have to face that prospect. Wilson Tuckey has backed the move - An opposition member interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Let us hope so. As I said, Wilson Tuckey has backed the move, but in that process he took it to a completely new level. In his usual inimitable style and eagerness, the federal member for O’Connor seemed to be making an argument completely against uranium mining. I heard him on the radio, and I had to listen to it several times to make sure that it was not a comedy show that I was listening to and was the real thing: he said the following on radio 720 yesterday - I think it’s better that at every point of the production process you know exactly where the uranium is. I’d much prefer to have it delivered back at the end of its useful economic life than have some raving lunatic dictator send it by rocket. . . . I would be much more comfortable on account of my grandkids to know that none of it was going to come back in a rocket. Please remember, you don’t have to make a nuclear bomb to be able to utilise radioactive material to devastate a community - you can put it in an ordinary bomb . . . Realising where that public debate was going, the Prime Minister has attempted to play down that latest slip, but he has not done a successful job of doing so. He has very much left open the possibility that we could enter into some arrangement whereby we receive back the nuclear waste. Discussions are going on now with officials in the United States in that regard. It is absolutely clear cut, and anyone who refuses to see where this debate is going is blinding himself to the reality on all sorts of fronts. The commonwealth government has already indicated - I think it was the federal Treasurer - a preparedness to override the wishes of the state and to force uranium mining out of Western Australia. That has already been indicated. We can see the federal government’s general attitude towards states’ rights and responsibilities under the industrial relations legislation, which is currently being challenged in the High Court. Of course, I think it was last year that the commonwealth government was trying to impose upon South Australia - now I think it is doing the same with the Northern Territory - a decision to make it accept a nuclear waste storage facility in that state against its wishes. The commonwealth’s intent and attitude is quite clear. Western Australians, I think, understand the issue much more clearly than some of the people who comment on this matter give them credit for. Ordinary Western Australians understand where this matter is going. If the mining and export of uranium from Western Australia were allowed, the prospect would be hastened of this state becoming a receiver point for nuclear waste for the entire industry. There will come a time in the next couple of years when Western Australians will be able to make a choice whether they want that to happen. The policies of the Western Australian Liberal Party are taking us in that direction. That is a clear choice that people will be able to make for themselves.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I will come to him later. As Premier of Western Australia, I will not allow this state to become a nuclear waste dump. I do not think that anybody who thinks seriously about the issue would doubt that there is a movement happening that, unless we stand up to it, resist it and fight against it, will deliver us in that direction. We have heard from the opposition before about that prospect. We have heard it raised this week in the federal political domain by none other than the Acting Prime Minister. I listened with great interest this morning as the Prime Minister was asked in the United States whether he would rule out accepting nuclear waste. His response was, “There is nothing to rule out.” There is something to rule out. There is the very real prospect that Australia - we know that, given its political and geological stability, that probably means Western Australia - is being looked upon as a possible receival point for the world’s nuclear waste. Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: We cannot have that. This point has already been conceded by people on the other side of the argument: if we allow uranium to be mined in and exported out of Western Australia, we must face the prospect that in return we will take responsibility for receiving the waste from that industry. We have to face that prospect. Very senior members on the opposition benches have actually said that. Mark Vaile said it. One of the great philosophers of Liberal politics in Australia has said it - Wilson Tuckey. Mr C.J. Barnett : I thought you were talking about senior people. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The member for Cottesloe has conceded that point himself. We have to face that prospect. Wilson Tuckey has backed the move - An opposition member interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Let us hope so. As I said, Wilson Tuckey has backed the move, but in that process he took it to a completely new level. In his usual inimitable style and eagerness, the federal member for O’Connor seemed to be making an argument completely against uranium mining. I heard him on the radio, and I had to listen to it several times to make sure that it was not a comedy show that I was listening to and was the real thing: he said the following on radio 720 yesterday - I think it’s better that at every point of the production process you know exactly where the uranium is. I’d much prefer to have it delivered back at the end of its useful economic life than have some raving lunatic dictator send it by rocket. . . . I would be much more comfortable on account of my grandkids to know that none of it was going to come back in a rocket. Please remember, you don’t have to make a nuclear bomb to be able to utilise radioactive material to devastate a community - you can put it in an ordinary bomb . . . Realising where that public debate was going, the Prime Minister has attempted to play down that latest slip, but he has not done a successful job of doing so. He has very much left open the possibility that we could enter into some arrangement whereby we receive back the nuclear waste. Discussions are going on now with officials in the United States in that regard. It is absolutely clear cut, and anyone who refuses to see where this debate is going is blinding himself to the reality on all sorts of fronts. The commonwealth government has already indicated - I think it was the federal Treasurer - a preparedness to override the wishes of the state and to force uranium mining out of Western Australia. That has already been indicated. We can see the federal government’s general attitude towards states’ rights and responsibilities under the industrial relations legislation, which is currently being challenged in the High Court. Of course, I think it was last year that the commonwealth government was trying to impose upon South Australia - now I think it is doing the same with the Northern Territory - a decision to make it accept a nuclear waste storage facility in that state against its wishes. The commonwealth’s intent and attitude is quite clear. Western Australians, I think, understand the issue much more clearly than some of the people who comment on this matter give them credit for. Ordinary Western Australians understand where this matter is going. If the mining and export of uranium from Western Australia were allowed, the prospect would be hastened of this state becoming a receiver point for nuclear waste for the entire industry. There will come a time in the next couple of years when Western Australians will be able to make a choice whether they want that to happen. The policies of the Western Australian Liberal Party are taking us in that direction. That is a clear choice that people will be able to make for themselves.
Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: We cannot have that. This point has already been conceded by people on the other side of the argument: if we allow uranium to be mined in and exported out of Western Australia, we must face the prospect that in return we will take responsibility for receiving the waste from that industry. We have to face that prospect. Very senior members on the opposition benches have actually said that. Mark Vaile said it. One of the great philosophers of Liberal politics in Australia has said it - Wilson Tuckey. Mr C.J. Barnett : I thought you were talking about senior people. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The member for Cottesloe has conceded that point himself. We have to face that prospect. Wilson Tuckey has backed the move - An opposition member interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Let us hope so. As I said, Wilson Tuckey has backed the move, but in that process he took it to a completely new level. In his usual inimitable style and eagerness, the federal member for O’Connor seemed to be making an argument completely against uranium mining. I heard him on the radio, and I had to listen to it several times to make sure that it was not a comedy show that I was listening to and was the real thing: he said the following on radio 720 yesterday - I think it’s better that at every point of the production process you know exactly where the uranium is. I’d much prefer to have it delivered back at the end of its useful economic life than have some raving lunatic dictator send it by rocket. . . . I would be much more comfortable on account of my grandkids to know that none of it was going to come back in a rocket. Please remember, you don’t have to make a nuclear bomb to be able to utilise radioactive material to devastate a community - you can put it in an ordinary bomb . . . Realising where that public debate was going, the Prime Minister has attempted to play down that latest slip, but he has not done a successful job of doing so. He has very much left open the possibility that we could enter into some arrangement whereby we receive back the nuclear waste. Discussions are going on now with officials in the United States in that regard. It is absolutely clear cut, and anyone who refuses to see where this debate is going is blinding himself to the reality on all sorts of fronts. The commonwealth government has already indicated - I think it was the federal Treasurer - a preparedness to override the wishes of the state and to force uranium mining out of Western Australia. That has already been indicated. We can see the federal government’s general attitude towards states’ rights and responsibilities under the industrial relations legislation, which is currently being challenged in the High Court. Of course, I think it was last year that the commonwealth government was trying to impose upon South Australia - now I think it is doing the same with the Northern Territory - a decision to make it accept a nuclear waste storage facility in that state against its wishes. The commonwealth’s intent and attitude is quite clear. Western Australians, I think, understand the issue much more clearly than some of the people who comment on this matter give them credit for. Ordinary Western Australians understand where this matter is going. If the mining and export of uranium from Western Australia were allowed, the prospect would be hastened of this state becoming a receiver point for nuclear waste for the entire industry. There will come a time in the next couple of years when Western Australians will be able to make a choice whether they want that to happen. The policies of the Western Australian Liberal Party are taking us in that direction. That is a clear choice that people will be able to make for themselves.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER: We cannot have that. This point has already been conceded by people on the other side of the argument: if we allow uranium to be mined in and exported out of Western Australia, we must face the prospect that in return we will take responsibility for receiving the waste from that industry. We have to face that prospect. Very senior members on the opposition benches have actually said that. Mark Vaile said it. One of the great philosophers of Liberal politics in Australia has said it - Wilson Tuckey. Mr C.J. Barnett : I thought you were talking about senior people. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The member for Cottesloe has conceded that point himself. We have to face that prospect. Wilson Tuckey has backed the move - An opposition member interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Let us hope so. As I said, Wilson Tuckey has backed the move, but in that process he took it to a completely new level. In his usual inimitable style and eagerness, the federal member for O’Connor seemed to be making an argument completely against uranium mining. I heard him on the radio, and I had to listen to it several times to make sure that it was not a comedy show that I was listening to and was the real thing: he said the following on radio 720 yesterday - I think it’s better that at every point of the production process you know exactly where the uranium is. I’d much prefer to have it delivered back at the end of its useful economic life than have some raving lunatic dictator send it by rocket. . . . I would be much more comfortable on account of my grandkids to know that none of it was going to come back in a rocket. Please remember, you don’t have to make a nuclear bomb to be able to utilise radioactive material to devastate a community - you can put it in an ordinary bomb . . . Realising where that public debate was going, the Prime Minister has attempted to play down that latest slip, but he has not done a successful job of doing so. He has very much left open the possibility that we could enter into some arrangement whereby we receive back the nuclear waste. Discussions are going on now with officials in the United States in that regard. It is absolutely clear cut, and anyone who refuses to see where this debate is going is blinding himself to the reality on all sorts of fronts. The commonwealth government has already indicated - I think it was the federal Treasurer - a preparedness to override the wishes of the state and to force uranium mining out of Western Australia. That has already been indicated. We can see the federal government’s general attitude towards states’ rights and responsibilities under the industrial relations legislation, which is currently being challenged in the High Court. Of course, I think it was last year that the commonwealth government was trying to impose upon South Australia - now I think it is doing the same with the Northern Territory - a decision to make it accept a nuclear waste storage facility in that state against its wishes. The commonwealth’s intent and attitude is quite clear. Western Australians, I think, understand the issue much more clearly than some of the people who comment on this matter give them credit for. Ordinary Western Australians understand where this matter is going. If the mining and export of uranium from Western Australia were allowed, the prospect would be hastened of this state becoming a receiver point for nuclear waste for the entire industry. There will come a time in the next couple of years when Western Australians will be able to make a choice whether they want that to happen. The policies of the Western Australian Liberal Party are taking us in that direction. That is a clear choice that people will be able to make for themselves.
Mr C.J. Barnett : I thought you were talking about senior people. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The member for Cottesloe has conceded that point himself. We have to face that prospect. Wilson Tuckey has backed the move - An opposition member interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Let us hope so. As I said, Wilson Tuckey has backed the move, but in that process he took it to a completely new level. In his usual inimitable style and eagerness, the federal member for O’Connor seemed to be making an argument completely against uranium mining. I heard him on the radio, and I had to listen to it several times to make sure that it was not a comedy show that I was listening to and was the real thing: he said the following on radio 720 yesterday - I think it’s better that at every point of the production process you know exactly where the uranium is. I’d much prefer to have it delivered back at the end of its useful economic life than have some raving lunatic dictator send it by rocket. . . . I would be much more comfortable on account of my grandkids to know that none of it was going to come back in a rocket. Please remember, you don’t have to make a nuclear bomb to be able to utilise radioactive material to devastate a community - you can put it in an ordinary bomb . . . Realising where that public debate was going, the Prime Minister has attempted to play down that latest slip, but he has not done a successful job of doing so. He has very much left open the possibility that we could enter into some arrangement whereby we receive back the nuclear waste. Discussions are going on now with officials in the United States in that regard. It is absolutely clear cut, and anyone who refuses to see where this debate is going is blinding himself to the reality on all sorts of fronts. The commonwealth government has already indicated - I think it was the federal Treasurer - a preparedness to override the wishes of the state and to force uranium mining out of Western Australia. That has already been indicated. We can see the federal government’s general attitude towards states’ rights and responsibilities under the industrial relations legislation, which is currently being challenged in the High Court. Of course, I think it was last year that the commonwealth government was trying to impose upon South Australia - now I think it is doing the same with the Northern Territory - a decision to make it accept a nuclear waste storage facility in that state against its wishes. The commonwealth’s intent and attitude is quite clear. Western Australians, I think, understand the issue much more clearly than some of the people who comment on this matter give them credit for. Ordinary Western Australians understand where this matter is going. If the mining and export of uranium from Western Australia were allowed, the prospect would be hastened of this state becoming a receiver point for nuclear waste for the entire industry. There will come a time in the next couple of years when Western Australians will be able to make a choice whether they want that to happen. The policies of the Western Australian Liberal Party are taking us in that direction. That is a clear choice that people will be able to make for themselves.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The member for Cottesloe has conceded that point himself. We have to face that prospect. Wilson Tuckey has backed the move - An opposition member interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Let us hope so. As I said, Wilson Tuckey has backed the move, but in that process he took it to a completely new level. In his usual inimitable style and eagerness, the federal member for O’Connor seemed to be making an argument completely against uranium mining. I heard him on the radio, and I had to listen to it several times to make sure that it was not a comedy show that I was listening to and was the real thing: he said the following on radio 720 yesterday - I think it’s better that at every point of the production process you know exactly where the uranium is. I’d much prefer to have it delivered back at the end of its useful economic life than have some raving lunatic dictator send it by rocket. . . . I would be much more comfortable on account of my grandkids to know that none of it was going to come back in a rocket. Please remember, you don’t have to make a nuclear bomb to be able to utilise radioactive material to devastate a community - you can put it in an ordinary bomb . . . Realising where that public debate was going, the Prime Minister has attempted to play down that latest slip, but he has not done a successful job of doing so. He has very much left open the possibility that we could enter into some arrangement whereby we receive back the nuclear waste. Discussions are going on now with officials in the United States in that regard. It is absolutely clear cut, and anyone who refuses to see where this debate is going is blinding himself to the reality on all sorts of fronts. The commonwealth government has already indicated - I think it was the federal Treasurer - a preparedness to override the wishes of the state and to force uranium mining out of Western Australia. That has already been indicated. We can see the federal government’s general attitude towards states’ rights and responsibilities under the industrial relations legislation, which is currently being challenged in the High Court. Of course, I think it was last year that the commonwealth government was trying to impose upon South Australia - now I think it is doing the same with the Northern Territory - a decision to make it accept a nuclear waste storage facility in that state against its wishes. The commonwealth’s intent and attitude is quite clear. Western Australians, I think, understand the issue much more clearly than some of the people who comment on this matter give them credit for. Ordinary Western Australians understand where this matter is going. If the mining and export of uranium from Western Australia were allowed, the prospect would be hastened of this state becoming a receiver point for nuclear waste for the entire industry. There will come a time in the next couple of years when Western Australians will be able to make a choice whether they want that to happen. The policies of the Western Australian Liberal Party are taking us in that direction. That is a clear choice that people will be able to make for themselves.
An opposition member interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Let us hope so. As I said, Wilson Tuckey has backed the move, but in that process he took it to a completely new level. In his usual inimitable style and eagerness, the federal member for O’Connor seemed to be making an argument completely against uranium mining. I heard him on the radio, and I had to listen to it several times to make sure that it was not a comedy show that I was listening to and was the real thing: he said the following on radio 720 yesterday - I think it’s better that at every point of the production process you know exactly where the uranium is. I’d much prefer to have it delivered back at the end of its useful economic life than have some raving lunatic dictator send it by rocket. . . . I would be much more comfortable on account of my grandkids to know that none of it was going to come back in a rocket. Please remember, you don’t have to make a nuclear bomb to be able to utilise radioactive material to devastate a community - you can put it in an ordinary bomb . . . Realising where that public debate was going, the Prime Minister has attempted to play down that latest slip, but he has not done a successful job of doing so. He has very much left open the possibility that we could enter into some arrangement whereby we receive back the nuclear waste. Discussions are going on now with officials in the United States in that regard. It is absolutely clear cut, and anyone who refuses to see where this debate is going is blinding himself to the reality on all sorts of fronts. The commonwealth government has already indicated - I think it was the federal Treasurer - a preparedness to override the wishes of the state and to force uranium mining out of Western Australia. That has already been indicated. We can see the federal government’s general attitude towards states’ rights and responsibilities under the industrial relations legislation, which is currently being challenged in the High Court. Of course, I think it was last year that the commonwealth government was trying to impose upon South Australia - now I think it is doing the same with the Northern Territory - a decision to make it accept a nuclear waste storage facility in that state against its wishes. The commonwealth’s intent and attitude is quite clear. Western Australians, I think, understand the issue much more clearly than some of the people who comment on this matter give them credit for. Ordinary Western Australians understand where this matter is going. If the mining and export of uranium from Western Australia were allowed, the prospect would be hastened of this state becoming a receiver point for nuclear waste for the entire industry. There will come a time in the next couple of years when Western Australians will be able to make a choice whether they want that to happen. The policies of the Western Australian Liberal Party are taking us in that direction. That is a clear choice that people will be able to make for themselves.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Let us hope so. As I said, Wilson Tuckey has backed the move, but in that process he took it to a completely new level. In his usual inimitable style and eagerness, the federal member for O’Connor seemed to be making an argument completely against uranium mining. I heard him on the radio, and I had to listen to it several times to make sure that it was not a comedy show that I was listening to and was the real thing: he said the following on radio 720 yesterday - I think it’s better that at every point of the production process you know exactly where the uranium is. I’d much prefer to have it delivered back at the end of its useful economic life than have some raving lunatic dictator send it by rocket. . . . I would be much more comfortable on account of my grandkids to know that none of it was going to come back in a rocket. Please remember, you don’t have to make a nuclear bomb to be able to utilise radioactive material to devastate a community - you can put it in an ordinary bomb . . . Realising where that public debate was going, the Prime Minister has attempted to play down that latest slip, but he has not done a successful job of doing so. He has very much left open the possibility that we could enter into some arrangement whereby we receive back the nuclear waste. Discussions are going on now with officials in the United States in that regard. It is absolutely clear cut, and anyone who refuses to see where this debate is going is blinding himself to the reality on all sorts of fronts. The commonwealth government has already indicated - I think it was the federal Treasurer - a preparedness to override the wishes of the state and to force uranium mining out of Western Australia. That has already been indicated. We can see the federal government’s general attitude towards states’ rights and responsibilities under the industrial relations legislation, which is currently being challenged in the High Court. Of course, I think it was last year that the commonwealth government was trying to impose upon South Australia - now I think it is doing the same with the Northern Territory - a decision to make it accept a nuclear waste storage facility in that state against its wishes. The commonwealth’s intent and attitude is quite clear. Western Australians, I think, understand the issue much more clearly than some of the people who comment on this matter give them credit for. Ordinary Western Australians understand where this matter is going. If the mining and export of uranium from Western Australia were allowed, the prospect would be hastened of this state becoming a receiver point for nuclear waste for the entire industry. There will come a time in the next couple of years when Western Australians will be able to make a choice whether they want that to happen. The policies of the Western Australian Liberal Party are taking us in that direction. That is a clear choice that people will be able to make for themselves.
I think it’s better that at every point of the production process you know exactly where the uranium is. I’d much prefer to have it delivered back at the end of its useful economic life than have some raving lunatic dictator send it by rocket. . . . I would be much more comfortable on account of my grandkids to know that none of it was going to come back in a rocket. Please remember, you don’t have to make a nuclear bomb to be able to utilise radioactive material to devastate a community - you can put it in an ordinary bomb . . . Realising where that public debate was going, the Prime Minister has attempted to play down that latest slip, but he has not done a successful job of doing so. He has very much left open the possibility that we could enter into some arrangement whereby we receive back the nuclear waste. Discussions are going on now with officials in the United States in that regard. It is absolutely clear cut, and anyone who refuses to see where this debate is going is blinding himself to the reality on all sorts of fronts. The commonwealth government has already indicated - I think it was the federal Treasurer - a preparedness to override the wishes of the state and to force uranium mining out of Western Australia. That has already been indicated. We can see the federal government’s general attitude towards states’ rights and responsibilities under the industrial relations legislation, which is currently being challenged in the High Court. Of course, I think it was last year that the commonwealth government was trying to impose upon South Australia - now I think it is doing the same with the Northern Territory - a decision to make it accept a nuclear waste storage facility in that state against its wishes. The commonwealth’s intent and attitude is quite clear. Western Australians, I think, understand the issue much more clearly than some of the people who comment on this matter give them credit for. Ordinary Western Australians understand where this matter is going. If the mining and export of uranium from Western Australia were allowed, the prospect would be hastened of this state becoming a receiver point for nuclear waste for the entire industry. There will come a time in the next couple of years when Western Australians will be able to make a choice whether they want that to happen. The policies of the Western Australian Liberal Party are taking us in that direction. That is a clear choice that people will be able to make for themselves.
. . . I would be much more comfortable on account of my grandkids to know that none of it was going to come back in a rocket. Please remember, you don’t have to make a nuclear bomb to be able to utilise radioactive material to devastate a community - you can put it in an ordinary bomb . . . Realising where that public debate was going, the Prime Minister has attempted to play down that latest slip, but he has not done a successful job of doing so. He has very much left open the possibility that we could enter into some arrangement whereby we receive back the nuclear waste. Discussions are going on now with officials in the United States in that regard. It is absolutely clear cut, and anyone who refuses to see where this debate is going is blinding himself to the reality on all sorts of fronts. The commonwealth government has already indicated - I think it was the federal Treasurer - a preparedness to override the wishes of the state and to force uranium mining out of Western Australia. That has already been indicated. We can see the federal government’s general attitude towards states’ rights and responsibilities under the industrial relations legislation, which is currently being challenged in the High Court. Of course, I think it was last year that the commonwealth government was trying to impose upon South Australia - now I think it is doing the same with the Northern Territory - a decision to make it accept a nuclear waste storage facility in that state against its wishes. The commonwealth’s intent and attitude is quite clear. Western Australians, I think, understand the issue much more clearly than some of the people who comment on this matter give them credit for. Ordinary Western Australians understand where this matter is going. If the mining and export of uranium from Western Australia were allowed, the prospect would be hastened of this state becoming a receiver point for nuclear waste for the entire industry. There will come a time in the next couple of years when Western Australians will be able to make a choice whether they want that to happen. The policies of the Western Australian Liberal Party are taking us in that direction. That is a clear choice that people will be able to make for themselves.
I would be much more comfortable on account of my grandkids to know that none of it was going to come back in a rocket. Please remember, you don’t have to make a nuclear bomb to be able to utilise radioactive material to devastate a community - you can put it in an ordinary bomb . . . Realising where that public debate was going, the Prime Minister has attempted to play down that latest slip, but he has not done a successful job of doing so. He has very much left open the possibility that we could enter into some arrangement whereby we receive back the nuclear waste. Discussions are going on now with officials in the United States in that regard. It is absolutely clear cut, and anyone who refuses to see where this debate is going is blinding himself to the reality on all sorts of fronts. The commonwealth government has already indicated - I think it was the federal Treasurer - a preparedness to override the wishes of the state and to force uranium mining out of Western Australia. That has already been indicated. We can see the federal government’s general attitude towards states’ rights and responsibilities under the industrial relations legislation, which is currently being challenged in the High Court. Of course, I think it was last year that the commonwealth government was trying to impose upon South Australia - now I think it is doing the same with the Northern Territory - a decision to make it accept a nuclear waste storage facility in that state against its wishes. The commonwealth’s intent and attitude is quite clear. Western Australians, I think, understand the issue much more clearly than some of the people who comment on this matter give them credit for. Ordinary Western Australians understand where this matter is going. If the mining and export of uranium from Western Australia were allowed, the prospect would be hastened of this state becoming a receiver point for nuclear waste for the entire industry. There will come a time in the next couple of years when Western Australians will be able to make a choice whether they want that to happen. The policies of the Western Australian Liberal Party are taking us in that direction. That is a clear choice that people will be able to make for themselves.
Realising where that public debate was going, the Prime Minister has attempted to play down that latest slip, but he has not done a successful job of doing so. He has very much left open the possibility that we could enter into some arrangement whereby we receive back the nuclear waste. Discussions are going on now with officials in the United States in that regard. It is absolutely clear cut, and anyone who refuses to see where this debate is going is blinding himself to the reality on all sorts of fronts. The commonwealth government has already indicated - I think it was the federal Treasurer - a preparedness to override the wishes of the state and to force uranium mining out of Western Australia. That has already been indicated. We can see the federal government’s general attitude towards states’ rights and responsibilities under the industrial relations legislation, which is currently being challenged in the High Court. Of course, I think it was last year that the commonwealth government was trying to impose upon South Australia - now I think it is doing the same with the Northern Territory - a decision to make it accept a nuclear waste storage facility in that state against its wishes. The commonwealth’s intent and attitude is quite clear. Western Australians, I think, understand the issue much more clearly than some of the people who comment on this matter give them credit for. Ordinary Western Australians understand where this matter is going. If the mining and export of uranium from Western Australia were allowed, the prospect would be hastened of this state becoming a receiver point for nuclear waste for the entire industry. There will come a time in the next couple of years when Western Australians will be able to make a choice whether they want that to happen. The policies of the Western Australian Liberal Party are taking us in that direction. That is a clear choice that people will be able to make for themselves.
Western Australians, I think, understand the issue much more clearly than some of the people who comment on this matter give them credit for. Ordinary Western Australians understand where this matter is going. If the mining and export of uranium from Western Australia were allowed, the prospect would be hastened of this state becoming a receiver point for nuclear waste for the entire industry. There will come a time in the next couple of years when Western Australians will be able to make a choice whether they want that to happen. The policies of the Western Australian Liberal Party are taking us in that direction. That is a clear choice that people will be able to make for themselves.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.