Debate resumed from 28 November, on motion by Ms Julie Bishop:

That this bill be now read a second time.

upon which Ms Macklin moved by way of amendment:

That all words after “That” be omitted with a view to substituting the following words: “the House:

(1)

refuses the Bill a second reading, because of the Howard Government’s:

(a)

continuing arrogant approach imposing a nuclear waste dump on the people of the Northern Territory without proper scientific assessment and consultation processes;

(b)

broken election commitments to not locate a waste dump in the Northern Territory;

(c)

overriding of many Federal, State and Territory legal protections, rights and safeguards;

(d)

destruction of any recourse to procedural fairness provisions for anyone wishing to challenge the Minister’s decision to impose a waste dump on the people of the Northern Territory;

(e)

continuing and aggravated disregard of the International Atomic Energy Commission’s recommendations on good social practices like consultation and transparency in relation to nuclear waste;

(f)

failure to deliver a national waste repository after ten long years in government, and,

(2)    in light of the Howard Government’s imposition of a nuclear waste dump on the Northern Territory community, and the recent High Court decision in the Workchoices case, expresses deep concern that the Howard Government will override community objections and State and Territory laws to impose nuclear reactors and high level nuclear waste dumps on local communities across Australia”.

See this item in context