Motions

Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission

The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL (Cheltenham—Premier) (11:59): I move:

1. That in the opinion of this house, a joint committee be established to consider the findings of the Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission, focusing on the issues associated with the establishment of a nuclear waste storage facility, and to provide advice, and report on, any South Australian government legislative, regulatory or institutional arrangements, and any other matter that the committee sees fit.

2. That in the event of a joint committee being appointed, the House of Assembly shall be represented thereon by three members, of whom two shall form a quorum of assembly members necessary to be present at all sittings of the committee.

3. That a message be sent to the Legislative Council transmitting the foregoing resolution and requesting its concurrence thereto.

The Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission's final report was delivered to the government on Friday 6 May. As we are all now familiar, it is a comprehensive report that makes 12 key recommendations, the most significant of which, of course, is for us to pursue the establishment of a fuel and intermediate-level waste storage facility in South Australia.

The royal commission did find that it was both safe and viable to pursue a used fuel waste storage facility and that there would be extraordinary economic benefits for South Australia. However, the commissioner also found that it was necessary for there to be broad social and specific community consent and that such a proposal would not be achievable without those two things being present.

He also noted that political bipartisanship would be an essential feature in the potential for South Australia to increase our involvement in the nuclear fuel cycle, and this is obvious, because it reflects the long-term generational impact of the royal commission's recommendations. For obvious reasons there could be no commitment to such a long-term solution without that extending beyond the limits of any particular political cycle, or indeed the life of any one particular government of any particular persuasion.

We have, of course, released the royal commission's report and announced a detailed consultation process through which all South Australians will have the opportunity of putting forward their views. This motion is an element of that process. It proposes the establishment of a joint house select committee to consider the findings of the Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission. A joint house select committee is important because both houses of the South Australian parliament should be involved in this matter.

The reason we have chosen to focus on the nuclear waste storage facility is that that is, if you like, the near-term possibility which requires our attention. It suggests that we should also focus on a particular element of that facility, and that is to provide advice and report on any South Australian government legislative regulatory or institutional arrangements or any other matters the committee sees fit. It is in that sense that we think the broadest possible cross-section of both the parliament and indeed the political arrangements should be represented on this committee; so, government members, opposition members and crossbench members represented in equal proportion.

This committee will enable the parliament and parliamentary representatives, or at least a committee of us, to analyse and debate the royal commission's final report, and in doing so contribute to the broader community engagement process on this report. Ultimately, it will be a question for governments to decide on whether we do expand our role in the nuclear fuel cycle, but the work of the joint house select committee will help inform the government's response to the report, which I intend to deliver to the parliament by the end of the year.

The royal commission's final report provides a substantial evidentiary base for South Australians to consider and does mark the beginning of an important process. That is not to say that the 15 months that span the royal commission's report have not involved some degree of community engagement, but we do know that there is a relatively low level of understanding of the findings of the royal commission's report.

There is a substantial body of opinion that, essentially, people are uncomfortable about making a decision about how they feel about this matter, because they do not have enough information to do that, so the public consultation process is not merely about trying to gauge community views about this matter but also to assist more people in this community to actually have the information necessary for them to arrive at a judgement.

In a real sense, what we are doing through this process is not asking people to decide: we are asking people to give us the permission to decide. What we really want is for people to have reached the conclusion that, 'We've had our say. It's now over to the political process to have their say and to analyse what we've said.'

We are not abdicating the responsibility of leadership. We accept the responsibility of leadership, but what comes with that is a corresponding responsibility to engage as many citizens as possible, and that is at the heart of our consultation process. It is at the heart of why we want this committee established, and we believe that this committee could be one of the most important committees this parliament has ever established, as it makes a valuable contribution to this most important decision about our state's future.

Ms CHAPMAN (Bragg—Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (12:06): I rise to speak on the Premier's motion to indicate to the house that the opposition will support this motion and agrees with the government that the appropriate course now to deal with the recommendation, if any recommendation is otherwise taken up by any governments, is that it be done with the social licence to support the same. This is a measure upon which that can be embraced and, appropriately, the terms of reference of the joint committee proposed will focus on the nuclear waste storage facility.

Members will be aware that, of the four areas of investigation and consultation resulting from the report from royal commissioner Scarce, this was the one that in certain circumstances had an identified financial benefit for the state. We accept that the purpose of this exercise will be to identify the wishes of the public, that they will have had an opportunity to consider the material presented in the report to then form a view and submit a view to a forum, which can then comprehensively consider that and provide a report to the parliament.

Having been invited to have two representatives on the committee, the opposition has identified that the shadow minister for the opposition in the state parliament (member for Stuart) will be nominated together with the Hon. Rob Lucas in another place. These two members of this parliament are representative of each of the houses. They are most senior in respect of the area of resources and, of course, Treasury from our side of the house, and that is a measure of how we view the importance of this progressing in a mature, orderly and effective way. We thank those two members for indicating their willingness to undertake this task.

I say that particularly because we would expect that the government will allocate sufficient funding and resources for this joint committee to be accessible and available and convene in a manner that enables South Australians across the state, from border to border, to have the opportunity to present. Not everyone has email and not everyone has the capacity to prepare a written submission, and we want all South Australians to have the opportunity to have a say if they wish.

I note, as I am sure the Premier has, that already some South Australians, individually or whether they be from academia, the resource world, the environment world or, indeed, union representatives yesterday, have spoken up with their views and their opinions in respect of any advance in this area. We want to ensure that all of them have an opportunity to have a say.

The joint committee, once established, will need some time to undertake that responsibly, to ensure that it is effective and that it is able to comprehensively take those submissions. It is a task that will be unenviable in its magnitude but we support the motion and we thank the two nominated members from the opposition for taking up that challenge. We ask the government to join in to ensure that senior members of the government are also nominated, and we look forward to the deliberations and ultimate recommendations of the committee.

The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL (Cheltenham—Premier) (12:10): I thank the Deputy Leader of the Opposition for her support for the motion and her foreshadowed nomination of alternatives and, once the bill returns to this place, we will indicate on behalf of the government the representatives who will be offered for service on this committee. I commend the motion to the house.

Motion carried.