The uranium policy of the former government was a bit like the doctrine of the Holy Trinity. Everyone knew it had three parts, but no-one was sure quite how they fitted into a coherent whole. Labor’s three-mines policy had no philosophic base. All attempted rationalisations failed. It permitted uranium mining and exports and even acknowledged that some uranium atoms from Australia might find their way into nuclear-weapons testing. There was no complete ban on new mines because under the policy the Olympic Dam mine at Roxby Downs in South Australia was begun. That decision was based on the fact that uranium was a necessary by-product of mining other minerals. As it happened, at the time a state Labor Government needed some projects to boost its re-election chances.
On the other hand, Labor used economic arguments to oppose new mines where other factors were involved. Labor said, for example, that new mines in Western Australia and the Northern Territory would not be economically viable.
Perhaps the foundation of the trinity of mines policy under Labor could best be described as a balancing act of keeping both the intellectual and industrial supporters of Labor in the fold and of appeasing all factions.
The policy … if it can be called that … was against the national interest. Australia has about half the world’s uranium reserves and about 10 per cent of the market. Canada, with much smaller reserves has three times the market share of Australia. The three-mine policy had not prevented one nuclear power station from going ahead or caused one to close. And it did not even have the advantage of moral purity to give Australia a warm inner glow (if such a phrase is appropriate when dealing with this subject). All the three-mines policy did was prevent Australia from increasing export earnings and from providing extra jobs.
The Coalition has no such difficulty. It does not have to deal with factions or appease pressure groups. Its policy has the advantage of ending the absurdity of the three-mines policy and being philosophically consistent. Uranium mining is to be no different from other mining.
Conservation groups are outraged and have warned about mining in sensitive areas, the environmental danger of the nuclear cycle, the danger of Australian uranium getting into nuclear weapons and Aboriginal opposition.
But the Government has said that uranium mining has to meet the stringent environmental standards of other mines; it can argue that fossil fuel and hydro-power are perhaps more environmentally destructive than nuclear electricity generation; that the weapons danger is already there and nothing Australia does with respect to uranium supply can remove it; and that Aboriginal opposition is far from united.
On the question of Aboriginal people and mining, it is often the case that Aboriginal communities see benefits from mining. Post-Mabo, they are likely to get more benefits as mining companies realise it is far quicker, easier and cheaper to get agreement with Aboriginal communities rather than face long and costly native-title proceedings.