In February 2010, Resources Minister Martin Ferguson introduced the National Radioactive Waste Management Bill into the House of Representatives, saying it represented "a responsible and long overdue approach for an issue that impacts on all Australian communities".

The legislation names Muckaty, 120 kilometres north of Tennant Creek in the Northern Territory, as the only site to remain under active consideration for a national nuclear waste dump.

The proposal is highly contested by the NT Government and is also being challenged in the Federal Court by Traditional Owners. Despite this, the Bill passed a Senate vote on March 13 with only the Greens and Independent Nick Xenophon opposing it.

Ferguson's legislation repeals three Department of Defence site nominations made by the Howard government − Harts Range, Mt Everard and Fisher's Ridge − but preserves the highly contested Muckaty nomination.

Mitch, a spokesperson for Harts Range and Mt Everard said "It is almost seven years since the NT dump plan was announced. We are happy that Harts Range is now off the list but we support the Muckaty people to say no. This proposal is based on politics not science. This is a very sad day."

Traditional Owners are angry that they continue to be sidelined. Muckaty Traditional Owner Penny Phillips, from the Wirntiku group, "The government should wait for the court case before passing this law. Traditional Owners say no to the waste dump. We have been fighting against this for years and we will keep fighting. We don't want it in Muckaty or anywhere in the NT."

Greens Senator Scott Ludlam called for the vote on the proposed law to be delayed, saying "It is either a complete waste of the parliament's time to be debating a bill that targets a site which, if the applicants to the Federal Court action are successful, will be taken permanently off the table or it may prejudice or get in the way of that action itself."

Ferguson's law is a crude cut and paste of the Howard government's Commonwealth Radioactive Waste Management Act that it purports to replace. It limits the application of federal environmental protection legislation and it curtails appeal rights. The draft legislation overrides the Aboriginal Heritage Protection Act and it sidesteps the Aboriginal Land Rights Act. It allows for the imposition of a dump on Aboriginal land with no consultation with or consent from Traditional Owners. In fact, the Minister can now override any state or territory law that gets in the way of the dump plan.

Before it won government, Labor promised to address radioactive waste management issues in a manner that would "ensure full community consultation in radioactive waste decision-making processes", and to adopt a "consensual process of site selection". Yet despite many invitations, Martin Ferguson refuses to meet with Traditional Owners opposed the dump.

Traditional Owners have now written to the Governor General asking her to meet with them before considering whether to give Royal Assent to the law.

Bribery

Nigel Scullion, Country Liberal Senator for the NT, was originally opposed to the dump being foisted on the NT. He has now changed his mind after securing a deal with the Gillard Government for funding for NT medical services.

Scullion's deal would see an initial injection of $10 million by the Commonwealth - with states and the ACT then paying the NT to store waste produced in their jurisdictions. However, Scullion admits this sweetener was not needed for the Coalition to support Ferguson's Bill, telling ABC News last week "We were supporting this in any event".

Penny Phillips asked in response "Who is Nigel Scullion to sell our land out from under us for $10 million dollars? He's never even been out to Muckaty to see the land he's trying to sell. That's our land and we say no to the waste dump."

NT Chief Minister Paul Henderson has called the deal "offensive". Gerry McCarthy, member for the Barkly region where Muckaty is located, called it "bribery", adding: "This debate is far too important for a short term fix with a cheap approach to try and pay somebody off to get a storage facility established quickly."

Medical professionals have called for federal politicians to stop using nuclear medicine as justification for the Muckaty proposal. Nuclear radiologist Dr Peter Karamoskos wrote in the NT News: "…the contention that is most in error is that the radioactive waste to be disposed of there is largely nuclear medicine waste. Nearly all such waste is actually short-lived and decays in local storage and is subsequently disposed of safely in the normal waste systems without need for a repository. The vast bulk of the waste ... is Lucas Heights nuclear reactor operational waste, and contaminated soil from CSIRO research on ore processing in the 1950s and 1960s."

Toxic trade-off

A toxic trade-off of basic services for a nuclear waste dump has been part of this story from the start. The Muckaty nomination was originally made with the promise of $12 million compensation for a small group identified by the Northern Land Council as the exclusive Traditional Owners.

The Traditional Owner who was the main proponent of the dump passed away in late 2011. At a Senate Inquiry she gave the following evidence: "As you have probably heard, the government do not have money for out-stations anymore ... So we made a decision about this waste problem to get money to build up our outstations, to get money to go back to our land and have schooling, have employment, have health out on the land itself."

Both the NT and Commonwealth governments have systematically stripped back resources for small remote Indigenous communities, placing increased pressure on them to accept long-term and high impact projects like the waste dump.

While Ferguson's legislation passed the Senate with government and Coalition support, there is a broad and growing alliance that will challenge the proposal every step of the way.

After a trade union delegation visited Tennant Creek last August, Peter Simpson, from the Electrical Trades Union's Queensland Branch, told the local newspaper the unionists had agreed to do everything they could to stop the nuclear dump from proceeding. A growing number of councils along the transport corridor have also voiced their opposition.

Traditional Owner Pamela Brown from the Milwayi group told New Matilda, "We want the government to come down and see us and we can show them all the sites, we want Martin Ferguson and the others to comes out to Muckaty. We want them to come out and see - people will do ceremony, our way, to prove who really owns Muckaty. That's our way, not whitefella way, if we are talking about land".

Protest actions will continue in Tennant Creek across the Territory and a photo exhibition of the community titled "Manuwangku, Under the Nuclear Cloud" has begun a national tour.

The campaign against the Muckaty dump continues to call for a comprehensive and independent inquiry into the full range of radioactive waste management options in Australia.

In the meantime, there is a simple solution: leave the waste where it is produced at the Lucas Heights nuclear research centre, run by the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation, which is south of Sydney. That is where the waste is produced, and that is where Australia's nuclear expertise is concentrated.

As Dr Ron Cameron from ANSTO said: "ANSTO is capable of handling and storing wastes for long periods of time. There is no difficulty with that." Similar views have been expressed by the Commonwealth nuclear regulator, ARPANSA, by the Australian Nuclear Association and even by Martin Ferguson's own department.

Fighting Ferguson's Dump

A nuclear waste dump on Aboriginal land should go ahead even if the land's traditional owners have been incorrectly identified to government, the Commonwealth has told the Federal Court.

If it was found that a land council gave the federal government incorrect information about the traditional owners of Muckaty Station, 120 kilometres north of Tennant Creek, it would not invalidate the government's 2007 approval for a dump there, Commonwealth lawyer Dr Stephen Donaghue SC said in Melbourne yesterday.

He said the government's new radioactive waste law requires only that a land council present evidence of who the traditional owners are - not that the evidence be true.

A group of elders, including Ngapa elders Mark Lane Jangala, claim that they are among the traditional owners of the station. The Northern Land Council had excluded the group, identifying the family of Amy Lauder (who has since died) as owners instead. Counsel for the groups, Ron Merkel QC, told Justice Tony North that the land council was a commercial body, that Ms Lauder was a member of the council, and that his clients' exclusion had involved ''misleading and deceptive'' conduct. Misconduct was denied by the council, represented by Sturt Glacken SC.  

Mr Merkel sought a full trial of the case and accused the Commonwealth of delaying proceedings.

''People are elderly and dying and already the most important person in the case has died,'' he said.

Mr Merkel said the government would only need to give 10 days notice to declare the site a dump and there was ''only a shortlist of one'' possible site: Muckaty Station.

The radioactive waste law, which passed Senate this month, has been opposed by environmental and indigenous groups who say the powers it grants to Resources Minister Martin Ferguson are too broad.

Dr Donaghue said the law, which was expected to receive the Governor General's approval within days, included new requirements that owners be consulted before a final declaration was made.

''Why would an injunction be issued before any of that process has been gone through?,'' he said.

He said it was a misuse of resources to embark on a trial to identify the traditional owners.

He said payments to traditional owners - which could reach as much as $12 million - were compensation rather than commercial in nature and therefore were not subject to the prohibitions against misleading and deceptive conduct in the Trade Practices Act.

Radioactive Dump - With 10 Days' Notice, Court Told

India's successful test firing of its first intercontinental ballistic missile - the Agni-V - has been met with delirium inside the country, but consternation over its borders.

Indian TV yesterday showed scenes of hundreds of cheering scientists at Wheeler Island, where the missile was launched in the Bay of Bengal, after its successful flight.

At 8.06am, the 20-metre rocket, which has the theoretical capability to carry a nuclear warhead up to 5000 kilometres, was launched, taking 20 minutes to reach its target somewhere in the Indian Ocean near Indonesia.

The Indian Defence Minister, AK. Antony, heaped praise on India's Defence Research Development Organisation, which designed and built the missile.

''The nation stands tall today,'' he said. ''We have joined the elite club of nations. The immaculate success of the Agni-V is a major milestone in the country's missile research and development program.''

India joins the five permanent members of the UN Security Council - the US, Britain, China, Russia and France - as the only countries with intercontinental ballistic missiles. Fast emerging as an economic power, India is keen to play a larger role on the global stage and is campaigning strongly for a permanent seat on the Security Council.

It was recently declared the world's largest importer of arms and has raised its defence budget 17 per cent this year, to more than $38 billion.

As pointed out ad nauseum on Indian news channels, the Agni-V missile - it is named after the Hindu god of fire - has the capability to reach Beijing, from where most of the concern over yesterday's launch came.

A pointed editorial in the Global Times newspaper, owned by the Communist Party's mouthpiece, the People's Daily, said India was still poor and lacked infrastructure. ''But its society is highly supportive of developing nuclear power and the West chooses to overlook India's disregard of nuclear and missile control treaties.''

China said it wanted peace with India, and warned its neighbour against an arms race.

''India should not overestimate its strength. Even if it has missiles that could reach most parts of China, that does not mean it will gain anything from being arrogant during disputes with China.''

Mixed Views Over Missile Success

Ahem ....

Of course, not a word of condemnation from the world's fearless defender of hypocrisy, Barack Obama, or his laughable amateurish awstraylen deputy side-kick, 'little red' Gillard, about this reckless behaviour by India - a well-known 'rogue' nuclear state, which has refused to sign the nuclear non-proliferation treaty.

Only a few days ago, Barack accused North Korea of 'violations' of UN security council resolutions when it announced that it was mounting a satellite launch, claiming that the launch vehicle was really an intercontinental ballistic missile, whilst 'little red' complained loudly about North Korea's 'deliberate provocations', that 'violate international norms' .....

Hmmmnn, seems it's OK for India to 'violate international norms' & we'll reward them by agreeing to sell them uranium; but it'd not OK for those evil-doers in North Korea to do the same thing ..... no way, by jiminy!!

What a joke our politicians are!!