Ann: Wiluna Uranium Project Update, page-66

I think you are way too optimistic.

The question is WHY would a Labour-Green alliance change policy & remove the ban after the election?

Think about it, it makes no sense.

Here are all the reasons why they wouldn't change polucy after the election:

1) They win the election with the policy in place, and thus an implicit mandate to maintain the policy. They can't end the policy after being elected on that policy platform in the first place.

2) They win the election through green party preferences. The green party demands that the ban remain in place. That is the deal. To get the green party's preference votes, Labour must honour the deal, and maintain the policy in place after the election.

3) The amount of money earned through royalties and worker income tax receiots from the uranium mining srctor is relatively small. It's not something that can influence political decisions.


4) It's only a tiny, tiny, tiny, subset of WA voters who even know about uranium mining, let alone care about it. It's not even a top 5 issue for the election. There's no votes in it for Kabour to care about it at all. But, on the opposite side, almost every singke green party voter is passionately anti-uranium mining. So, politically, Labour will always side with the Green party on this, coz they need to their preference votes.

So, I just don't get why you think the Labour-Green alliance would suddenly change their minds after the election.

Can you please explain your logic, in a way that deals with the above points.