Dr LIM - 1999-11-24
Yesterday in response to one of the many interjections from the Labor members opposite, he made mention of the future of Jabiru and how it is linked with the operation or otherwise of the Jabiluka mine. Can he tell Territorians what is the future of the town of Jabiru if attempts by Labor and activist Jacqui Katona to close ERA’s uranium project in Arnhem Land is successful?
ANSWER
Mr Speaker, the issues of Jabiluka, the present Ranger uranium mine and the future of the town of Jabiru are very serious. To date those issues have been left predominantly in the hands of others. From my point of view, I will be endeavouring now to get the leadership – when I say the leadership, I am talking about myself, Senator Hill, Senator Minchin and Galarrwuy Yunupingu - to see if we can work our way through the impasse that has developed, to get some sense into the situation of Jabiru.
The situation that has now been reached at Jabiru in relation to Ranger uranium mine gives another opportunity for the Labor leader to demonstrate what is her policy with regard to uranium mining in the Territory. Certainly the former Labor leader in the Northern Territory supported uranium mining, but within moments of the present leader assuming leadership she said: ‘Over the next couple of months we will be taking a look at the policy and whether times have changed’. Will you? Have they? She made that statement with regard to uranium mining in February. It’s now November and we would like to know whether she has a policy on uranium mining and Ranger, whether times have changed and what exactly is her position.
The situation with regard to the Ranger uranium mine is simply this, in my opinion. ERA works in the international arena to gain contracts for its product. Those contracts require certainty of supply, sometimes for 10 years or more, in order to secure them. ERA has a mine, Ranger, which has 5 to 8 years life left in it at most. It is already in an extremely difficult position to be able to secure contracts for its future life in that particular area.
Whether or not Jabiluka ever goes ahead has been continually stalled by what we believe are the efforts, the totally irresponsible efforts, of a minority. I hoped that the Northern Land Council had some sway at the end of the day - I still hold that faint hope - to get some sense into the situation. The predicament at the moment is that Ranger is almost at the end of its life, and Jabiluka is stalled indefinitely. The latest proposal is that ERA should spend another $160m to put a mill at Jabiluka rather than taking the environmentally and economically sound approach of milling at Ranger. I believe it is simply another stalling tactic to ensure that Jabiluka does not go ahead at the end of the day. There’s no doubt in my mind that the next issue will be a sacred sites issue with relation to where that mill at Jabiluka could be located.
The point that everyone needs to understand - particularly the Labor opposition who are about to run a matter of public importance with regard to regional development – is that money doesn’t grow on trees. It comes from the taxpayers and from producers such as ERA in order to promote development and provide for the welfare and betterment of Territorians generally.
If the Ranger uranium mine closes, Jabiru will die. I can’t say that any more clearly than I’ve said it. Jabiru will die. This government will not be replacing power facilities or housing, and the royalty payments that currently flow to that area will cease. The people in that area who are holding up that development need to clearly understand that. There is a great opportunity in that area, with environmentally sound support, for the Jabiluka mine to go ahead and produce a large income and an excellent future for the people of Jabiru, including in the tourist industry. But that will not occur. If the leadership out there wants pristine wilderness in the Jabiru area, that is precisely what they will get at the end of the day. When we hear of these sorts of stalling tactics, I want the average Territorian to understand that absolutely clearly.
I point to this fact. There was some time ago a town called East Jabiru. It housed 2000 people and occupied an area of 30 ha. It had a school and medical centre, a police station, a supermarket, 2 caravan parks and a recreation area with an in-ground swimming pool and a basketball court. It was replaced by Jabiru, 7 km away.
Mr STIRLING: A point of order, Mr Speaker! The words are taken directly from a statement that the Chief Minister is due to give later in the day.
Mr SPEAKER: It makes no difference. There is no point of order.
Mr BURKE: At east Jabiru, all roads, houses and facilities have been removed, including the town’s powerlines and piping and sewerage farm. ERA cites it as one of their most successful rehabilitation efforts to date. Well, another rehabilitation effort will likely occur if the present impasse is not overcome. I can only emphasise the simple fact that if it is pristine wilderness that the people in that area want, that is precisely what they will get.
ANSWER
Mr Speaker, the issues of Jabiluka, the present Ranger uranium mine and the future of the town of Jabiru are very serious. To date those issues have been left predominantly in the hands of others. From my point of view, I will be endeavouring now to get the leadership – when I say the leadership, I am talking about myself, Senator Hill, Senator Minchin and Galarrwuy Yunupingu - to see if we can work our way through the impasse that has developed, to get some sense into the situation of Jabiru.
The situation that has now been reached at Jabiru in relation to Ranger uranium mine gives another opportunity for the Labor leader to demonstrate what is her policy with regard to uranium mining in the Territory. Certainly the former Labor leader in the Northern Territory supported uranium mining, but within moments of the present leader assuming leadership she said: ‘Over the next couple of months we will be taking a look at the policy and whether times have changed’. Will you? Have they? She made that statement with regard to uranium mining in February. It’s now November and we would like to know whether she has a policy on uranium mining and Ranger, whether times have changed and what exactly is her position.
The situation with regard to the Ranger uranium mine is simply this, in my opinion. ERA works in the international arena to gain contracts for its product. Those contracts require certainty of supply, sometimes for 10 years or more, in order to secure them. ERA has a mine, Ranger, which has 5 to 8 years life left in it at most. It is already in an extremely difficult position to be able to secure contracts for its future life in that particular area.
Whether or not Jabiluka ever goes ahead has been continually stalled by what we believe are the efforts, the totally irresponsible efforts, of a minority. I hoped that the Northern Land Council had some sway at the end of the day - I still hold that faint hope - to get some sense into the situation. The predicament at the moment is that Ranger is almost at the end of its life, and Jabiluka is stalled indefinitely. The latest proposal is that ERA should spend another $160m to put a mill at Jabiluka rather than taking the environmentally and economically sound approach of milling at Ranger. I believe it is simply another stalling tactic to ensure that Jabiluka does not go ahead at the end of the day. There’s no doubt in my mind that the next issue will be a sacred sites issue with relation to where that mill at Jabiluka could be located.
The point that everyone needs to understand - particularly the Labor opposition who are about to run a matter of public importance with regard to regional development – is that money doesn’t grow on trees. It comes from the taxpayers and from producers such as ERA in order to promote development and provide for the welfare and betterment of Territorians generally.
If the Ranger uranium mine closes, Jabiru will die. I can’t say that any more clearly than I’ve said it. Jabiru will die. This government will not be replacing power facilities or housing, and the royalty payments that currently flow to that area will cease. The people in that area who are holding up that development need to clearly understand that. There is a great opportunity in that area, with environmentally sound support, for the Jabiluka mine to go ahead and produce a large income and an excellent future for the people of Jabiru, including in the tourist industry. But that will not occur. If the leadership out there wants pristine wilderness in the Jabiru area, that is precisely what they will get at the end of the day. When we hear of these sorts of stalling tactics, I want the average Territorian to understand that absolutely clearly.
I point to this fact. There was some time ago a town called East Jabiru. It housed 2000 people and occupied an area of 30 ha. It had a school and medical centre, a police station, a supermarket, 2 caravan parks and a recreation area with an in-ground swimming pool and a basketball court. It was replaced by Jabiru, 7 km away.
Mr STIRLING: A point of order, Mr Speaker! The words are taken directly from a statement that the Chief Minister is due to give later in the day.
Mr SPEAKER: It makes no difference. There is no point of order.
Mr BURKE: At east Jabiru, all roads, houses and facilities have been removed, including the town’s powerlines and piping and sewerage farm. ERA cites it as one of their most successful rehabilitation efforts to date. Well, another rehabilitation effort will likely occur if the present impasse is not overcome. I can only emphasise the simple fact that if it is pristine wilderness that the people in that area want, that is precisely what they will get.
Last updated: 09 Aug 2016