The greens, in hindsight, seemed to have given Carpenter the suckers punch when they put forward the challenge back in july.....(see the article below). Isn't hindsight a wonderful thing to those naive enough to be living in the past. The greens can be thanked for their ignorance of consequences of their opposition to carbon free energy. It makes me wonder what they stand for when they oppose something that is good for the environment. They still have a few loose cannons by the look of their allowance of very loose yet historically significant statements (by the greens in WA). They, more than any other political party , should be demanding carbon free energy. At one stage I was offered a position as co-ordinator of one of the national conservation organisations, but whilst I philosophically am more green than a lot of the members, they have some very outspoken, ill informed and radical positions that prevented any hint of interest in the organisation. They have too many individuals who are just not on the same page as the increasingly green main stream society when it comes to large scale, economic and real reduction of carbon emission initiatives and solutions. The lack of electoral success of the Greens saw no candidate elected to the legislative assembly despite an increase in vote from 7.6% to 11.7%. Greens state MP in the legislative council Mr Paul Llewellyn should be called to account for his naive commentary that lead to the Carpenter demise (one of numerous reasons). Had the greens in WA been serious about reducing carbon emissions, they would have tried to do a preference deal with the LIBS who had the better carbon policies, they could have maybe got a couple of their candidates elected into the assembly and been inside the tent rather than dancing around on the grass outside. Change is something they seem to find hard to understand. The world is increasing it's demand for energy and the demand for large scale carbon free solutions is not going to be met (as much as we might like it), from solar panels and wind turbines. The greens are being praised for their increased vote but the reality is, their pontificating on feel good issues needs to be given a reality check. If they had some serious leadership, they could offer the country so much but they keep getting into debates and coming up with policy positions that are emotional rather than intelligent.
From the 11 july 08 Australian.....
Japanese and Canadian miners' $500m bet on uraniumFont Size: Decrease Increase Print Page: Print Amanda O'Brien and Elizabeth Gosch | July 11, 2008 JAPANESE and Canadian mining giants have made a $500 million bet on a change of government in Western Australia after agreeing to buy Rio Tinto's vast uranium deposit in the Pilbara region of the state.
The state Labor Government remains vehemently opposed to uranium mining, but with an election expected in October, the sale of Rio Tinto's Kintyre uranium deposit sets up a major political brawl.
Under the deal unveiled yesterday, and which is expected to be completed next month, Canada's Cameco and Japan's Mitsubishi Development will pay $US496million ($519million) to buy the deposit, which could be worth up to $5 billion at current uranium oxide prices.
Cameco noted yesterday: "Australian governments and political parties generally are becoming more supportive of uranium development."
But the joint venture will not be able to mine the yellowcake unless there is a change of government in Western Australia. Although the federal Labor Party voted last year to dump the long-standing ban on new uranium mines, the states were left with the power to decide whether they would allow mining.
Western Australia and Queensland retain the strongest opposition to uranium mining, while South Australia, home to BHP Billiton's giant Olympic Dam deposit, is pressing ahead with new developments.
West Australian Opposition Leader Troy Buswell went on the attack yesterday, saying the state Government's opposition to uranium mining was "nonsensical and indefensible".
"Given that Australian uranium from South Australia and the Northern Territory is being mined, exported and used internationally, WA should be encouraging the mining of our uranium deposits," he told The Australian. "We are the resource state whose economy has long been driven by the resources sector, and uranium is strategically very important."
Premier Alan Carpenter was on a plane last night and could not be contacted, but Labor sources said there was no way he would change his view.
Only two weeks ago, Mr Carpenter declared at a state Labor conference that Western Australia's extensive uranium deposits would stay in the ground. "There will be no nuclear power, no nuclear waste and uranium mining in WA while I am the Premier," he said.
Mr Carpenter has repeatedly claimed uranium mining would open the door to Western Australia becoming a nuclear waste dump. Mr Buswell said the argument was rubbish.
"Alan Carpenter puts up the most ridiculous argument that if you export uranium you have to take back nuclear waste but that is not proven," Mr Buswell said.
Greens state MP Paul Llewellyn said the issue would be front and centre when parliament resumed next month and would become a key election issue.
The Greens have previously demanded the Government formalise its views by legislating to ban uranium mining, and introduced its own legislation to that effect last year. It has languished in the upper house, with the Government indicating it was unnecessary as its position was already clear.
Mr Llewellyn said the fact that companies were prepared to spend massive amounts in the expectation that Mr Carpenter would not always be Premier reinforced the need to legislate.
"Alan Carpenter might say it will happen over his dead body, but, if he's dead, the reality is there's no protection," he said.
At least 50 uranium prospecting licences have been issued in Western Australia, which has extensive deposits. That compares with 250 licences issued in Queensland and 279 licences in South Australia.
Mr Buswell said the West Australian Liberals were already conducting "serious policy work" on the issue.
(20min delay)