Dr LIM - 2000-08-08
How can we trust the members opposite, the Labor Party? Last week at the conference in Tasmania they decided to close down Jabiluka. Can the Chief Minister tell members of this parliament how many Territorians will lose their jobs if the Labor Party is successful in stopping the Jabiluka mine at Jabiru?
ANSWER
Mr Speaker, if the Labor Party is successful in stopping the Jabiluka uranium mine, 296 jobs will be lost in the Territory at the mine alone. That decrease will start from 2002.
On a broader scale, Jabiluka is estimated to have a net present value of around $6bn to the Australian economy. The money they are able to pay to the Northern Territory and federal governments each year due to Jabiluka is estimated to be the equivalent of 1500 jobs. Currently, 15% of the Ranger workforce is filled by Aboriginal people and over the life of the mine the company has paid more than $153m in royalties to Northern Territory Aboriginal people between 1981 and 1999.
What is interesting also is the Leader of the Opposition does not know what her own policies are with regard to uranium mining in the Northern Territory. She does not know what the position of her own members is in her own Territory branch of the federal Labor Party. She had the hide to mislead Territorians on last Friday’s Drive show by saying Labor has had a very clear policy on uranium mining, and nothing has changed. Nothing has changed!
On such an important issue, the Leader of the Opposition did not even contribute to the debate in Tasmania. I think on the same day she launched her business policy for the Northern Territory in Hobart. It sounds like a reasonable place. Yet at the same time a motion on Jabiluka was passed at that Labor conference which is quite different to the policy on uranium mining of the Labor Party federally and the Northern Territory up until that time. The motion says in part:
That the Labor Party continues opposition to the proposed mine at Jabiluka [very specific] and any application for the export of ore from that mine [this is a definitive federal position on that mine] and any ore that might be wished to be exported from that mine.
Yet the Leader of the Opposition says, firstly, nothing has changed. She says the Labor Party position in the Northern Territory agrees with the federal position. I quote from Hansard. In a debate in this House on 24 November last year the member for Arnhem, Mr Ah Kit said:
I want to make it clear from the outset that members on this side of the House, the opposition, are supportive of the Jabiluka uranium mine.
Mr Stirling, member for Nhulunbuy, in the same debate said:
The opposition has consistently supported Jabiluka in this House. Our position has not changed. We support Jabiluka now as we have consistently done.
There is a traitor in the ranks, or else this mob continues to mislead Territorians. Senator Trish Crossin, who purportedly represents Territorians, seconds the motion at the federal Labor conference, changing the Labor policy on uranium mining. She specifically succeeds in getting a motion up that opposes Jabiluka per se and any export or mining of ore from that mine. And the Leader of the Opposition in this House did not even contribute to that debate!
ANSWER
Mr Speaker, if the Labor Party is successful in stopping the Jabiluka uranium mine, 296 jobs will be lost in the Territory at the mine alone. That decrease will start from 2002.
On a broader scale, Jabiluka is estimated to have a net present value of around $6bn to the Australian economy. The money they are able to pay to the Northern Territory and federal governments each year due to Jabiluka is estimated to be the equivalent of 1500 jobs. Currently, 15% of the Ranger workforce is filled by Aboriginal people and over the life of the mine the company has paid more than $153m in royalties to Northern Territory Aboriginal people between 1981 and 1999.
What is interesting also is the Leader of the Opposition does not know what her own policies are with regard to uranium mining in the Northern Territory. She does not know what the position of her own members is in her own Territory branch of the federal Labor Party. She had the hide to mislead Territorians on last Friday’s Drive show by saying Labor has had a very clear policy on uranium mining, and nothing has changed. Nothing has changed!
On such an important issue, the Leader of the Opposition did not even contribute to the debate in Tasmania. I think on the same day she launched her business policy for the Northern Territory in Hobart. It sounds like a reasonable place. Yet at the same time a motion on Jabiluka was passed at that Labor conference which is quite different to the policy on uranium mining of the Labor Party federally and the Northern Territory up until that time. The motion says in part:
That the Labor Party continues opposition to the proposed mine at Jabiluka [very specific] and any application for the export of ore from that mine [this is a definitive federal position on that mine] and any ore that might be wished to be exported from that mine.
Yet the Leader of the Opposition says, firstly, nothing has changed. She says the Labor Party position in the Northern Territory agrees with the federal position. I quote from Hansard. In a debate in this House on 24 November last year the member for Arnhem, Mr Ah Kit said:
I want to make it clear from the outset that members on this side of the House, the opposition, are supportive of the Jabiluka uranium mine.
Mr Stirling, member for Nhulunbuy, in the same debate said:
The opposition has consistently supported Jabiluka in this House. Our position has not changed. We support Jabiluka now as we have consistently done.
There is a traitor in the ranks, or else this mob continues to mislead Territorians. Senator Trish Crossin, who purportedly represents Territorians, seconds the motion at the federal Labor conference, changing the Labor policy on uranium mining. She specifically succeeds in getting a motion up that opposes Jabiluka per se and any export or mining of ore from that mine. And the Leader of the Opposition in this House did not even contribute to that debate!
Last updated: 09 Aug 2016