James Stevens (Sturt, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

Australia already is nuclear. I rise to speak, most particularly, as a member from the city of Adelaide, which, until I heard some of the contributions earlier, I believed was receiving bipartisan support towards the decision made two years ago to obtain nuclear propelled submarines to be built in my home city of Adelaide.

My colleague and friend the member for Grey, of course, has about half the world's uranium in his electorate. He knows—and everyone in this chamber should know—that Australia has participated in the nuclear industry from many perspectives of the supply chain for many decades. As the member for Sturt, it's the future that I'm most concerned about when I hear some of the comments made by those opposite, particularly when it comes to the construction of nuclear submarines, which seems to now be in jeopardy, based on some of those remarks regarding safety.

There are always two elements to the debate about nuclear energy. One is economic and one is about safety and environmental concerns. This motion has nothing to do with economic points to do with nuclear energy because it's about removing a prohibition on it. It doesn't call for any taxpayer investment in building a particular nuclear plant, and, for those who understand the electricity market in this country—particularly in states that have a proper market operating—new generation comes into the market based on decisions that can be made by private capital, and they can't when you've got a prohibition on a certain technology. But, if there are economic arguments against any technology like nuclear energy, removing the ban won't change the economics of it, so the economic argument is completely irrelevant because no-one will put their private capital into an investment that is not going to achieve an economic return. That's the reason that we on this side of the chamber are so passionate about markets. So, when it comes to ruling out a technology on economic grounds, that means that you've got some kind of secret plan to dramatically change the way in which the electricity markets operate in this country, and that doesn't surprise us because, of course, you've been doing that very consistently and very recently.

But, on the safety side and on the dangerous rhetoric coming from those opposite, what we're effectively starting to understand about this government is that they have got a prejudice against nuclear technology. That is very concerning to anyone who relies on nuclear medicine. That is concerning to anyone, particularly from a state like mine. I'm representing many people who have an ambition to work in the nuclear industry into the future, particularly on the Future Submarine program, which involves nuclear technology, nuclear generation, nuclear reactors, frankly—small nuclear reactors, which are being demonised and attacked from a safety point of view. Eight of them, I understood, until this contribution from those opposite recently, were going into the bellies of submarines at construction yards in my home city of Adelaide as part of what I understood to be a bipartisan commitment towards the Royal Australian Navy being given a capability of nuclear propulsion within those submarines.

If that is now not the position of the government because of the points they've made about safety when it comes to small modular reactors, then it is the most spectacular revelation with unbelievable national security consequences that I have heard in my career in this chamber. If you're now junking nuclear subs because they're not safe and because, apparently, these reactors are dangerous and people do not want them—and we've heard even the minister rubbish the concept of small modular reactors—then I'd love to hear from other members of the government from Adelaide as to whether or not they support eight nuclear reactors being in the bellies of eight submarines that are being constructed in my home city of Adelaide, generating thousands of jobs for decades to come. If these reactors are unsafe, they're just as unsafe on the docks of Port Adelaide as they are in any other part of the nation. If you believe that the people of Adelaide are going to be unsafe with these nuclear reactors, then say so. I believe that's incorrect, and I am very passionately a supporter of nuclear submarine propulsion technology and of that happening in my home city of Adelaide. But, if the government now says that's dangerous and they're against it, firstly, come clean on it but, secondly, that is a dramatic and frightening revelation coming out of this debate.

See this speech in context