Mr ELFERINK - 1998-02-19
Is the multi-billion-dollar Jabiluka uranium mine still under threat from the Northern Territory branch of the Australian Labor Party?
Members interjecting.
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I am astounded by the reaction. When the Leader of the Opposition headed off to Hobart for Labor's national conference, what a song and dance we had from her! She was going to push to scrap Labor's restrictive 3-mine uranium policy. She was very confident that she would succeed. She said: 'I think I will get a win'.
Mrs Hickey: And I did.
Mr POOLE: Did she get a win? I have to agree with the vice-president of the Territory Minerals Council, Grant Watt, who told ABC radio that he had never seen Kim Beazley move so quickly in a long time. Maggie Hickey was on radio in the morning telling us she expected to succeed in getting Labor to change its uranium policy. There was a lightning reaction by Beazley who made sure he was on television that night telling us that she was wasting her time going to the conference, let alone trying to persuade anybody. He said on the ABC: 'Any resolution from her does not have my support'.
The Leader of the Opposition did not get much support from Labor's federal candidate for the Territory either. Warren Snowdon is so interested
Page 5
in Territory jobs! He was not even confident that she would have a go. He did not think that she would be effective among Labor's national membership of 60 000. I quote what Warren Snowdon told ABC radio:
Whether or not she chooses to express her view, which is contrary to that which is being put before the conference,
is a matter which we will find out tomorrow, but I doubt that she will.
Probably the most pathetic thing about all this is that the Leader of the Opposition thinks that she succeeded at the conference. I quote from the NT News of Wednesday 21 January. The headline was: 'Labor Drops 3-Mine Policy: Jabiluka OK'. Underneath was a nice photo of Maggie with a new haircut. The story said that she was confident that Jabiluka would be up and running before a change of government. Let me tell her that Jabiluka is not okay.
Mr Bailey: Jabiluka is not okay?
Mr POOLE: It certainly would not be okay if the unthinkable happened and the Labor Party got into government federally. The ALP federal spokesman for resources and energy, Stephen Smith, said in the Financial Review on Thursday that the definition of a new mine, as opposed to an existing mine which would be allowed to proceed, would have to be decided in each specific case because it was 'a complicated question of fact and law'. Mr Smith has stated publicly that, if the Commonwealth is required to give environmental approval or approval of a contract for the purpose of export, the mine would be seen as new and would not proceed. It certainly is a very complex policy.
ERA has to meet a number of very stringent requirements following the EIS process, and export contracts have yet to be put in place. If there were to be a federal election and the unthinkable happened as far as Australians are concerned and Labor did win, contrary to the Leader of the Opposition's very naive statement, I am quite sure Jabiluka would not go ahead. Labor is basically saying to Territorians that, if it had the chance, it would stop the Jabiluka mine. That is bad news for Territorians and Australians. Jabiluka is expected to stimulate economic activity in the amount of some $6200m in real gross domestic product. Royalties alone to the traditional owners would be expected to be about $210m. Labor does not even care about most of the people who vote for it. It is quite happy to cut $210m from the pockets of Aboriginals.
Between Jabiluka and Ranger, ERA expects to generate at least another 340 jobs. However, the 3-mine policy effectively would be a 2-mine policy if Labor were to win the next federal election. What sort of message is that for the mining industry? It is telling mining companies that it is okay for them to spend millions of dollars on exploration and to do all the feasibility studies and environmental impact studies and assessments but, if Labor comes into power one day before the companies have everything signed, sealed and delivered, they will not get up. Labor's policy is a tragedy for Territorians and Australians. I suggest to people that, if they are even considering voting for the Labor Party at the next federal election, they should think twice.
Madam SPEAKER: I need to remind ministers again that their answers are too long. Please keep them much shorter.
Members interjecting.
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I am astounded by the reaction. When the Leader of the Opposition headed off to Hobart for Labor's national conference, what a song and dance we had from her! She was going to push to scrap Labor's restrictive 3-mine uranium policy. She was very confident that she would succeed. She said: 'I think I will get a win'.
Mrs Hickey: And I did.
Mr POOLE: Did she get a win? I have to agree with the vice-president of the Territory Minerals Council, Grant Watt, who told ABC radio that he had never seen Kim Beazley move so quickly in a long time. Maggie Hickey was on radio in the morning telling us she expected to succeed in getting Labor to change its uranium policy. There was a lightning reaction by Beazley who made sure he was on television that night telling us that she was wasting her time going to the conference, let alone trying to persuade anybody. He said on the ABC: 'Any resolution from her does not have my support'.
The Leader of the Opposition did not get much support from Labor's federal candidate for the Territory either. Warren Snowdon is so interested
Page 5
in Territory jobs! He was not even confident that she would have a go. He did not think that she would be effective among Labor's national membership of 60 000. I quote what Warren Snowdon told ABC radio:
Whether or not she chooses to express her view, which is contrary to that which is being put before the conference,
is a matter which we will find out tomorrow, but I doubt that she will.
Probably the most pathetic thing about all this is that the Leader of the Opposition thinks that she succeeded at the conference. I quote from the NT News of Wednesday 21 January. The headline was: 'Labor Drops 3-Mine Policy: Jabiluka OK'. Underneath was a nice photo of Maggie with a new haircut. The story said that she was confident that Jabiluka would be up and running before a change of government. Let me tell her that Jabiluka is not okay.
Mr Bailey: Jabiluka is not okay?
Mr POOLE: It certainly would not be okay if the unthinkable happened and the Labor Party got into government federally. The ALP federal spokesman for resources and energy, Stephen Smith, said in the Financial Review on Thursday that the definition of a new mine, as opposed to an existing mine which would be allowed to proceed, would have to be decided in each specific case because it was 'a complicated question of fact and law'. Mr Smith has stated publicly that, if the Commonwealth is required to give environmental approval or approval of a contract for the purpose of export, the mine would be seen as new and would not proceed. It certainly is a very complex policy.
ERA has to meet a number of very stringent requirements following the EIS process, and export contracts have yet to be put in place. If there were to be a federal election and the unthinkable happened as far as Australians are concerned and Labor did win, contrary to the Leader of the Opposition's very naive statement, I am quite sure Jabiluka would not go ahead. Labor is basically saying to Territorians that, if it had the chance, it would stop the Jabiluka mine. That is bad news for Territorians and Australians. Jabiluka is expected to stimulate economic activity in the amount of some $6200m in real gross domestic product. Royalties alone to the traditional owners would be expected to be about $210m. Labor does not even care about most of the people who vote for it. It is quite happy to cut $210m from the pockets of Aboriginals.
Between Jabiluka and Ranger, ERA expects to generate at least another 340 jobs. However, the 3-mine policy effectively would be a 2-mine policy if Labor were to win the next federal election. What sort of message is that for the mining industry? It is telling mining companies that it is okay for them to spend millions of dollars on exploration and to do all the feasibility studies and environmental impact studies and assessments but, if Labor comes into power one day before the companies have everything signed, sealed and delivered, they will not get up. Labor's policy is a tragedy for Territorians and Australians. I suggest to people that, if they are even considering voting for the Labor Party at the next federal election, they should think twice.
Madam SPEAKER: I need to remind ministers again that their answers are too long. Please keep them much shorter.
Last updated: 09 Aug 2016