read and heed!, page-122

re: friday Hi GF, I realize you are just reportig what someone else said but I heard all these interviews this morning and all that was said has not been reported in the story.
McFarlane started off by saying that 12 companies are known tb exploring for uranium in the Territory (he did not give the list but up to 50% of these would be exploring in Kakadu. The list does not include any that have not had their exploration licences approved by the NT).
He then said that the Fed Govt recognized the difficulty faced by the NT insofar as a number of these were exploring in World Heritage listed areas that had been registered by his Govt.. Wha he did not say on this is that the Fed Govt has legislation which could block any mine application here.
He is right as the NT NNM's policy is just not founded on Fed ALP policy but takes into account Fed and NT concerns over damage to the environment and tourism. ( a view shared by the Lib Govt which maintain the Office of the Suoervising Scietist to specifially monitor the Kakadu environment as a serious waste spill into Magellan Creek could lead to damage to the Kakadu flood plain and spell disaster for Kakadu and creat a serious international incident. We should also remember that the Fed Govt was forced into spending at least $9-12M on the removal of contamination at CMR's Rum Jungle in the early 80's, years after the mine had closed and it was evident that earlier efforts to clean up the area had failed. This is a legacy that CMR may have to contend with in their PER public review process.
He then made the point that the NT could consider new U mines outside of these Heritage areas but was not asked about Rum Jungle-not a heritage area or for that matter, Coronation Hill.. He said that the Fed Atomic Energy Act could not be used to overturn the NT policy and that he was unaware of any other legislation that could be. He said they would be reluctant to overule the Territory and did not know if they had any powers. I suppose if the Feds did act using opposing legislation tactics they would first need to specifically legislate and would need to include all the other states that have bans. I see this as a political impossibility and a legal nightmare that would prevent proclamation of any such Bill.
There is an element of Fed bullying here as only the NT is being singled out and not Qld, WA, for example, where substantial U deposits exist. I think the Howard Govt sees the Territory as most likely to crack under pressure given that it was held by th CLP for 19 years, is almost totally dependant on excessive pro rata Fed and GST funding; has a small population-Darwin only 100,000 people with 150,000 n the NT, a poorly understood self-government act and the big carrot- the NT bid for statehood. Likewise I am not suprised that the Chinese Ambassador singled out the NT and ignored ALL the other states, ALL bound by the same Fed ALP policy. She could well have tackled this at the Canberra level. I personnally think she became angered at a a little govt defying thelargesse and power of China.
There is another example of the bullying in that the Feds have announced that they will be locating their nuclear waste from Lucas Heights in NSW to one of three sites in the NT, like it or not. They backed away from a fight with SA last year over using Woomera. What they have achieved is to unite the ALP govt with the CLP opposition to fight the move and have chosen one site at Harts Range where Bullion proposes to explore for U and another site that has residents. (Aborigines so they will have the land councils on their back).
There is a long way to go but China and the Feds will welcome all the base metals, phosphate and REE in the meantime.