howard may yet sideline the states, page-17

re: howard may yet sideline; rtenn Hi rtenn

I wouldn't get so excited over those possible justifications for the fed to exercise constitutional overall. As Howard said it is a very long way from happening and, imo, a case would be very difficult to make.

Firstly, even if all Labour states reversed policy today, new mines couldn't be up and running for many many years. Secondly the majority of future supply is sitting in a mine that is already open - Olympic Dam; bigger than the rest combined. Thirdly the NT comes in second and there ain't such restrictions there. Fourthly, uranium is a long way from being the signficant industry those posts refer to. Did I read a figure that current sales represent $300 million? Obviously significant increases in price change that.

I feel it would be an unbelievably long bow to argue that the Fed should override states on the basis that their current policy that is holding back mostly insignificant (in the long term) mines from production is against the national interest 7-10 years down the track when demand/supply balance is largely unknowable.

We'll wait and see but I won't be staking my purchase choices on such an event.