Dorinda Cox (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Atomic Energy Amendment (Mine Rehabilitation and Closure) Bill 2022. Ranger mine sits east of Darwin, smack bang in the middle of Kakadu National Park, a World Heritage listed site for its exceptional natural and cultural values. Kakadu has been home to First Nations people for over 50,000 years, and it is full of beautiful rock art, sacred sites, tidal flats and flood plains and provides a home for a wide range of rare species of animals and plants. It is a precious place, unlike any other in the world.

Despite this, in 1980 mining operations by Energy Resources Australia—or ERA, as it's commonly referred to—began at Ranger after the uranium deposit was discovered in 1969. Ranger mine ceased operations in January 2021, and in just over 40 years the mine had produced more than 130,000 tonnes of naturally radioactive triuranium octoxide—which is known as yellowcake—to be exported. This mine was established against the wishes of the traditional owners. In such a culturally and ecologically significant area, ERA were allowed to come in, bring their big machines and dig up dangerous and radioactive materials. In doing so they changed the landscape and the cultural heritage of the place.

What's done is done, but it's important to highlight that what we are considering today is the result of colonialism and corporate interest being considered more important than First Nations culture. ERA did not obtain consent from the traditional owners in any sense of the word, let alone in the context of free, prior and informed consent, which is paramount in respecting the sovereignty of traditional owners and their cultural heritage. This place must pass the Australian Greens's bill to legislate our obligations under the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which includes the principle of free, prior and informed consent. It's frankly embarrassing that this government and previous governments have made zero effort to legislate these commitments. But I think we all know why, and if this government is serious about giving First Nations people a voice, as it claims to be, it has to walk the walk and it has to support our bill. The principles of my colleague's bill are intrinsically linked to what we are considering here in this chamber today.

We all know that uranium is radioactive. We have all seen the impacts that exposure to radiation can have. We've seen the devastating impacts of the nuclear bombs dropped on Japan in World War II and the disasters of Chernobyl and Fukushima. And we've anxiously heard the recent threats from Russia. Whilst Australia has strict regulations around the use of Australian uranium to ensure it's not used in nuclear weapons and legislation at both federal and state and territory levels prohibits the use of nuclear energy at varying degrees, the fact that we are still mining and exporting uranium sends a very different message. In fact, it's hypocritical—we do not want it in our country, but we are happy to supply it to other countries. Clearly our concerns can be ignored if there's a nice pay cheque attached to the end of that.

You might tell yourself that's all fine because we learned from the catastrophes and we have appropriate safeguards in place to protect workers and people in the surrounding areas, right? In 2004, the supervising scientists at Ranger found the ERA had breached their environmental requirements in an incident where water was contaminated with uranium, leading to 28 workers falling ill. In 2013, a 1,400-cubic-metre tank of uranium oxide slurry and acid actually collapsed. In June this year, low-level radioactive waste was found in an excavator at Winnellie, some 275 kilometres away from the mine, after being transported through Kakadu National Park. This was considered a significant breach of the environmental plan due to the risk to both people and the environment. This was just at Ranger.

There are two other uranium mines in Australia—Olympic Dam and Four Mile. Both are in South Australia. I don't even want to get started on the nuclear waste dump in Kimba, which has seen significant opposition from locals and the traditional owners.

Indeed, traditional owners are fighting uranium mining all over this country. In Western Australia, the Upurli Upurli people are facing the threat of mining of uranium at Mulga Rock, which would be WA's first uranium mine. The company involved in this mining proposal, Deep Yellow, had connections with Rio Tinto at the time of the Juukan caves explosion and Paladin, who have a very concerning past. They include spills from uranium mines into nearby lakes, workers dying and getting sick, and workers striking over pay and work conditions.

Just yesterday morning we heard the British Prime Minister announce that Australian nuclear test veterans and scientists involved in the British nuclear testing at Maralinga, Emu Field and the Montebello Islands will receive a newly introduced service medal to mark 70 years since the first nuclear test across the Commonwealth. These tests devastated First Nations communities in the area, most of whom were displaced by these tests. This is the legacy of nuclear and uranium mining that has been left behind: destruction, death and displacement.

People working in uranium mines have a higher rate of lung cancer and other respiratory diseases, such as tuberculosis and emphysema, due to the dust that they may inhale as well as the radioactive inert gas radon, which is released when the ore is mined and crushed. Through the mining of uranium, not only are we damaging the environment, eroding cultural heritage at the same time; we are putting the health of workers and inhabitants in the area at risk.

In particular at Mulga Rock there are concerns that I have heard from the traditional owners that the dust will fall into the plants that kangaroos and other animals eat and which are eaten, in fact, by the traditional owners in that area. If this weren't bad enough, some of the shareholders from ERA were pushing for the company to reopen more uranium mines, particularly the one at Ranger. This, again, is against the wishes of traditional owners, who were opposed to the Ranger mine way back then, 40 years ago, and they are opposed to any further mines now. One of the shareholders was quoted as saying, 'It is in the best interests of all shareholders to give the Mirarr and the Northern Territory Land Council about 10 per cent of ERA and give them a seat on the board.' What is truly in the best interests of the Mirarr is ERA respecting their opposition to the destruction of their land and simply going off into the sunset.

Cultural heritage is not something that you can put a price tag on. The sheer arrogance of whitefellas telling First Nations people what is best for us will never cease to amaze me. I've been very pleased to see these proposals shut down.

Of course, the Greens want Ranger to be rehabilitated. We acknowledge that the unique legislative framework that Ranger sits under has some of the best rehabilitation standards in the country. They are arguably better than the EPBC Act, although that does more to show how inadequate our current environmental act is than show how good those standards are. We acknowledge that the unique legislative framework currently allows ERA access to the site until 2026 and that these changes are necessary to allow them more access to the land to complete rehabilitation beyond that time.

This bill was referred to the Economics Committee—and I want to acknowledge the work of the Acting Deputy President today, Senator Walsh, in her role as the chair—and a hearing was held in October, which I participated in, where we heard from various stakeholders, most notably ERA and the Gundjeihmi Aboriginal Corporation, who represent the traditional owners. I, along with others, was pleased to hear about the level of involvement of traditional owners in the rehabilitation, including consultation for this bill and committee memberships relating to the rehabilitation but also extending to the procurement of contracts and ensuring the rehabilitation will support the post-closure land use requirements, allowing traditional owners to reconnect to their country a connection that has been disrupted because of this mine.

It is paramount that traditional owners are deeply involved in every process of the rehabilitation of our own land, because we know the land. We know where things should be—trees, waterholes, grasses. We hold this knowledge, and it is passed down from our ancestors. It is our land, after all. This land will need to be managed for a long time, due to the potential radiation risks. This management will likely continue long after the companies have left, but these communities are the ones who will remain. It is these families who have lived there throughout the lifespan of the mine and will continue to be there long after. These are the people who need to be deeply entrenched in the rehabilitation process and should also be benefiting from it economically.

There have been issues raised about the cost of the rehabilitation, which is more than double what was originally estimated. Rehabilitation costs are currently sitting between $1.6 billion and $2.2 billion. This price tag could make Ranger the biggest rehabilitation exercise in the history of Australian mining. Ranger not being rehabilitated is in fact not an option. We cannot afford to have this mine abandoned or for ERA to pass this debt onto the government after profiting from this mine for 40 years. The rehabilitation of a mine is equally important as, if not more than, mining itself, and it must be treated as such. It should be the first part of an approval process of all mining licences in this country. Rio Tinto owns 86 per cent of ERA. Rio Tinto's annual profit in 2020-21 was $53.538 billion, so a price tag of $2.2 billion for rehabilitation is just a drop in the ocean for them. They've stated that they are committed to funding the rehabilitation of Ranger should ERA fail to do so, although we heard at the inquiry into this bill that there's no binding agreement between ERA and Rio Tinto that will require Rio to step in should that need arise.

The Greens support this bill, which will ultimately give the Mirarr their land back. But we hold some serious concerns about the funding of this rehabilitation, and I look forward to working with the government to ensure that companies are held responsible to clean up the mess they create.