Commenting on the opinion piece: Kimba nuke decision dumps on Indigenous rights
The Federal Government’s approach to the Kimba nuclear waste dump has been for many, five years of a living hell in a process of constant harassing, insisting on something which no one else in Australia wants.
Part of their arsenal was the guilt trip that we may no longer have nuclear medicine which their nuclear reactor at Lucas Heights, Sydney, produces.
They say they had no room for a couple of swimming pool size volumes of nuclear waste and it was a “distraction” for their staff, even though as long as there is a nuclear reactor at Lucas Heights there will always be nuclear waste on site.
After all if ANSTO, the government owned corporation with 1000 employees and 450 hectares of land wanted more land, why not purchase it in the large state of New South Wales, a convenient distance from the waste creator known as an OPAL nuclear reactor at Lucas Heights, Sydney.
Instead they chose to try some new legislation on Kimba, where the federal MP had offered ANSTO part of his farm.
That is where the living hell for many began at Kimba five years ago.
Today, after this unimaginable time enduring the bus loads of Canberra Department and ANSTO experts and seemingly unlimited taxpayer money, a generally contemptuous media and a totally divided community of 800 with our way of life changed forever, we are told we are the proud owners of a $300 million nuclear waste dump.
Meanwhile, the 400+ strong No waste on agricultural land on Kimba or SA group, who broadly represent the up to $80m annual export food industry, are totally rejected by government and received not a dollar to professionally examine impacts and results of the effect of nuclear waste on their occupation and the community’s lifeblood.
As they watched in utter dismay, the federal government, their – for me – trusted ally until now, poured $86m in promises to attain a Yes vote for a dump that no one else in Australia would accept.
As Aboriginal people are denied their democratic right and the incredible conflict of interest of a government-owned billion-dollar corporation receiving benefit from a taxpayer-induced outcome, which is easily shown that South Australia is polling 70% No, compared to Kimba’s 40% No.
This taxpayer-induced result, which if any other individual acted in this way would face criminal prosecution.
I am pleased to report that I am no longer a member of any political party. – Barry Wakelin, (former Liberal MP for Grey, 1993-2007)
Commenting on the story: Ex-Property Council chief eyes council seat
I remember Nathan Paine well when he was the mouthpiece for the Property Council.
I recall his opposition to the then mooted ‘car park tax’ on the stated grounds that Adelaide needed to first have a public transport system that is cheap, efficient and easy for people to use.
I suspect his real reasons were to minimise developer costs.
The city needs someone who represents the diverse needs and interests of the hundreds of thousands of people who visit and work in the city each day.
It doesn’t need someone who has obvious developer and landlord sympathies, who are already well represented. – John Tagliaferri
Commenting on the story: After 20 years, more waiting to see latest Le Cornu site development plan
So good to have independent Adelaide City councillors Phillip Martin and Ann Moran standing up for the right of we citizens to know what our political masters are doing on our behalf.
The amount of secrecy in the Adelaide City Council is extraordinary and leads to questions: Why should we not know what is being planned before decisions are made?
How real are the majority of councillors in their professed desire for community input if they repeatedly make decisions without it or with the barest semblance of consultation?
Are there vested interests involved in the desire for secrecy? – Ingrid Vogelzang
Want to comment?
Send us an email, making it clear which story you’re commenting on and including your full name (required for publication) and phone number (only for verification purposes). Please put “Reader views” in the subject.
We’ll publish the best comments in a regular “Reader Views” post. Your comments can be brief, or we can accept up to 350 words, or thereabouts.
We value local independent journalism. We hope you do too.
InDaily provides valuable, local independent journalism in South Australia. As a news organisation it offers an alternative to The Advertiser, a different voice and a closer look at what is happening in our city and state for free. Any contribution to help fund our work is appreciated. Please click below to become an InDaily supporter.