Sean Edwards (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

Oh, you have read the summary. I have read every word of the royal commission preliminary findings, and I found them to be quite encouraging. What we have now is a report on the table. Senator Ludlam and his assertions—the Greens political party can make a submission to the royal commission and put their contentions, and they can refute the facts of that royal commission that they believe are non-factual. They can tear down the findings of the royal commission, like Senator Ludlam has attempted to do in this chamber today.

He can do his own economic modelling. Senator Ludlam can do his. I have done mine. Mine also is vindicated by the findings of the royal commission. I had my paper peer reviewed around the world by a dozen different groups, scientific and economic. I am wondering whether Senator Ludlam has brought the same intellectual rigour to his submission here today in this chamber. I suspect not. I suspect the royal commission have also had their findings tested by eminent scientists and by people who have a background in economics, unlike what he has here today.

Also, there is this whole sense of fearmongering that goes with the contribution that was made by Senator Ludlam, whose trademark is opposing any progression in this area. He is now conflating the issues of low-level medical waste—medical waste which will come about as a result of one in two people in this country having an interaction with oncology services in this country. What we are doing by pulling these two together is subscribing to the Greens' fear and loathing of this whole policy position, which I suspect that in their heart of hearts they do not really believe, but they are so entrenched in this policy now that they cannot step away from it. They are so entrenched in it that they cannot stop it. Even the eight per cent of people who might vote for them around this country—

Senator Brandis interjecting—

They are just dogmatists in this whole debate. They just cannot move, because they think that if they do they will give up part of their branding.

What do we do then with all of the nuclear medical waste which is stored in 100 sites around this country? Just leave it in the basements of hospitals, shall we? Shall we not take it into a managed, controlled space where we can responsibly handle this? Your inflammatory language of, 'Oh, we'll put it in a car park out the back of South Australia,' demeans you, and it demeans the mentality of the debate which we are supposed to be having.

We are talking about a world-class arrangement, and Australia has been rated No. 1 in terms of regulation and governance of its nuclear facility. You heard that yourself, Senator Ludlam, at the last estimates. We are No. 1—ANSTO, our facility; in regulation; and the way in which we operate our nuclear science technology. That is no mean feat. I want to let anybody listening to this contribution know that, of the G20 countries, Australia is only one of two that are not nuclear nations—us and Italy, and Italy will be going down that path very soon.