opinion
Paul Murray: WA bans uranium mining. So why is Labor funding it?

Why would the Cook Government give hundreds of thousands of dollars to a mining company to explore for uranium when Labor has an effective ban on uranium mining in WA? To sharpen the point, why would it give Cauldron Energy two grants under its exploration incentive scheme when it knows the seismic surveying and drilling they fund – further confirming a world-class uranium deposit — will eventually hit the party’s nuclear brick wall? It doesn’t make any sense. But then again, the ideology-driven ban never did. In April, former Mines Minister David Michael announced the latest successful applicants for the EIS grants — without specifically naming Cauldron as a $217,750 beneficiary in the media release — supported by some confusing comments. “By backing high-risk, high-reward drilling, we are helping explorers bridge the gap from a geological lead to a world-class mine,” Michael said, fully realising one of the successful applicants had no prospect of mining from his largesse with taxpayer funds. It’s the ideological gap between exploration and mining, not the geological one, that is getting in the way of anybody trying to develop WA’s vast uranium resources. “With more boots on the ground and more rigs in the dirt, the EIS is fast-tracking the discoveries that will underpin our economy for decades,” Michael said, without a hint of irony. The progress of WA’s uranium finds has been anything but fast. As far back as 2014, Cauldron announced its Yanrey project, 85km south of Onslow, would be in production within five years. But as soon as Labor won office in 2017, Premier Mark McGowan slapped a ban on all uranium projects that had not been approved by the previous coalition government, effectively wrecking the emerging industry in WA. The last time a uranium project got a grant under the EIS scheme, started by the Barnett coalition government in 2009, was in the 2014-15 round. Just last month, Michael’s replacement as Mines Minister, Daniel Pastorelli, was asked at Diggers and Dealers whether the Albanese Government’s deal to supply uranium to India would change the WA ban. “We made an election commitment in 2017 – that is our position,” Pastorelli said. “There were some projects with approvals in place when we came to government. They haven’t gotten off the ground at this point in time.” That’s a pretty cute line — even for an accomplished spinner like him — given the games Labor has played with the four previously-approved projects. But he may regret not allowing a bit more wriggle room. Because he could end up sounding like Anthony Albanese on negative gearing. “We’ve changed our position, blah, blah, blah.” And Pastorelli knows how that worked in Secret Harbour. So does the grant to Cauldron signal that the Cook Government will drop the 2017 ban on uranium mining, which was never legislated and is effectively only administrative? Here’s the news flash: The rise in support for One Nation is about to put the skids under Labor’s longstanding and nonsensical policies on all things nuclear. The ALP risks being caught flat-footed on both the national nuclear power moratorium and WA’s ludicrous ban in the face of combined demands for the axing of both policies from One Nation, the Liberals and Nationals, fuelled by surging public discontent with net zero policies. Labor has quickly gone from being in a dominant political position where it could enforce blatantly ideological flights of fancy, to deep concern about the effect they are having on its declining power base. Voters have had enough. Federal Energy Minister Chris Bowen has fallen from being the Albanese Government’s green spear-thrower to a political headache as Labor’s energy policies, built around unrealistic assumptions about renewables and batteries, unravel. Pauline Hanson popped up in the unlikely setting of the Victorian coalfields on Monday pledging that the State had a nuclear future as part of a diversified baseload power system. “Keep your coal-fired power stations going and then eventually, in time, let’s look at nuclear, the smaller reactors that can be built,” Hanson said. “They’re doing it in Korea for about $6.5 billion, so it can be done.” One Nation’s new Victorian leader, Warren Pickering outlined the party’s energy policy for the November State election which would abolish all net-zero subsidies, scrap renewable energy zones and boost brown coal and gas use. Labor’s stranglehold on the potential for nuclear power to emerge in Australia as a green baseload power source is weakening — and so is the environmental standing of the Greens, who have also missed the boat. Albanese and Roger Cook think everyone should get excited about Australia’s critical minerals. And rightly so. But why are they so stolidly backward about the most critical mineral of them all to a decarbonised future — uranium and its role in nuclear power? Which brings us back to WA and David Michael’s peculiar decision to part-fund Cauldron Energy’s latest exploration efforts for a uranium project that is impossible under Labor’s ban. But that’s only one part of a puzzle in which Labor’s factional politicking is getting increasingly murky and corrupting sound government policy. In the face of green activist attempts to shut down WA’s gas export industry, Labor last year established a parliamentary inquiry by the Economics and Industry Standing Committee into “the role of WA in the global effort towards decarbonisation.” It was a blatant attempt to provide an environmental justification for WA’s gas export industry. But its terms of reference were loose enough that pro-uranium activists are using the inquiry to promote nuclear power as the ultimate emissions-free substitute for fossil fuels. Cauldron Energy CEO Jonathan Fisher says more than half of the submissions to the inquiry support dropping the uranium ban. Talk about the law of unintended consequences. “Global nuclear is growing strongly given its broad recognition as a clean energy source,” Fisher says in his submission. “Whilst Australia chooses not to build nuclear reactors for power generation domestically, many countries are relying on nuclear to meet their net zero objectives as well as their hugely increased future electricity needs driven by energy hungry technologies. “As the fuel source for the globally recognised baseload green energy source of nuclear energy, it logically follows that uranium is classified as a green fuel source and hence within the scope of the terms of reference despite not being specifically named. “In 2017 when the WA uranium ban was enacted nuclear’s (and hence uranium’s) status as ‘green’ was nowhere near as widely accepted as it is today; a fundamental change in global perception that warrants a revisiting of the mining policy. “Echoing the words of the Premier recently when talking about increasing gas exports, WA arguably has a moral obligation to sell our uranium to our trusted allies and trading partners to support their own decarbonisation efforts. “If we are serious about fighting global warming, we must put our best foot forward – and this means ensuring high ESG uranium supply for our trading partners. “Exporting green energy in the form of uranium is the highest impact activity WA can do to help the world decarbonise.” Fisher argued that modelling by the Chamber of Commerce and Industry, based on projected annual uranium production of 10,800 tonnes, shows WA could help mitigate around 415Mt of CO2 globally. That represents about 450 per cent of WA’s total carbon emissions of 89.4Mt. You’d think the Greens would be interested. Fisher then raised the major flaw in the WA ban: Why does Labor allow uranium to be mined safely and economically just over the border in South Australia? “Australia is already a major exporter of uranium from SA, but with the most uranium resources of any country on earth, we could be doing so much more,” Fisher’s submission said. “If SA can do this safely (with a proven 40-year track record of safe operations), there is no question about WA’s ability to do the same.” Fisher wants the parliamentary inquiry to recommend an independent scientific inquiry under the Environmental Protection Act into “the safety of a potential WA uranium mining industry (from an environmental, social, community and worker perspective).” That offers Labor a way forward. David Michael, from the Right faction, has set the scene for a reconsideration of the ban whose party support is tightly centred around Left metalworkers’ union boss, Steve McCartney. But Labor is not alone in dealing with the rapid realignment of net zero politics. It is also threatening to ensnare WA Liberal leader Basil Zempilas who clings to an outdated position despite his Federal colleagues’ departure to less green pastures under the influence of One Nation. Zempilas squirmed this week as News 24’s Andrew Clennell punctured some very thin arguments for sticking with his net zero ambitions — while quibbling about the timeline to achieve them — when the rest of the coalition has moved on. Good leaders sniff the winds of change.

opinionPaul Murray: WA bans uranium mining. So why is Labor funding it?

The No. 1 source of news for every West Australian

opinion
Paul Murray: WA bans uranium mining. So why is Labor funding it?