Commonwealth could override states on nuclear power.


A constitutional expert says the Federal Government could override state legislation banning nuclear power plants.
The Federal Government will consider constructing 25 nuclear power plants after a report found it was a viable alternative energy source.
Dr Ziggy Switkowski's nuclear review has found that Australia could start producing nuclear power within 15 years.
Premiers and Opposition leaders have said they will not allow nuclear power plants to be built in their states.
But Curtin University Professor Greg Craven says the recent High Court decision on the WorkChoices legislation paves the way for the Federal Government to overrule the states.
"The reality is that the only organisation that is ever going to build a nuclear power plant of any sort is going to be a corporation and the effect of the WorkChoices decision is pretty much that the Commonwealth can stop or allow a corporation to do almost anything it wants, simply by making a law addressed to a corporation," he said.
'Nuclear free' councils
Meanwhile, Australian councils who have declared themselves "nuclear free" are demanding the Federal Government commission a public inquiry into nuclear power.
Paul Tully from the Australian Local Government Nuclear Free Zones Secretariat says the public must now have their say on the issue.
"This report was prepared behind closed doors - there was no real public input," he said.
"There should be an opportunity for an open public inquiry, probably headed by a retired judge, so that the public has the opportunity and the confidence of having some input into a report rather than having one behind closed doors."
Mr Tully says more than 100 councils have declared that they are against nuclear power.
He says the Commonwealth will have a tough time convincing communities that nuclear power is safe.
"We'll be urging councils right around Australia to take up the cause to oppose any nuclear power stations in their own areas and we're warning the Federal Government that it won't be a lay-down affair," he said.
"There's a likelihood of strong opposition right across Australia to this proposal."
Opposition
Queensland Premier Peter Beattie and New South Wales Premier Morris Iemma both say they will not support any Federal Government moves to build nuclear power stations.
Mr Iemma says solar and wind energy and a national carbon emissions trading scheme are better ways for Australia to deal with climate change.
"One of the top three actions that governments can take are trading emissions schemes," he said.
"We've got one operating in New South Wales - it's taken the equivalent of 2 million cars off the road.
"There's a model that can apply nationally - [Prime Minister] John Howard won't even look at it."
Queensland Opposition Leader Jeff Seeney says he has no philosophical objection to nuclear power, but he does not think it would work in his state.
Mr Seeney says he does not think nuclear power would be economical in Queensland.
"We have got such a wonderful opportunity with the mouth of the mine coal-fired power stations that have been the base of Queensland's economy now for many years," he said.
"It would have to be some sort of a huge subsidy for nuclear power for it to compete with that."
South Australia
Meanwhile, South Australian Opposition Leader Iain Evans has criticised comments by Premier Mike Rann on nuclear energy.
The release of the review yesterday prompted Mr Rann to say he will consider legislating against a nuclear power plant in South Australia if necessary.
But Mr Evans says a plant would not be viable for decades so the pledge is simply a stunt.
"He didn't say that he wouldn't use electricity generated by nuclear power in other states through the interconnectors," he said.
"So if you examine the policy underneath it, you know, where does it lead? So it was just a news grab, it was a stunt in my view."
Mr Evans declined to offer support for a nuclear power plant in South Australia, saying it was a question for future generations.
"So what he's [Mike Rann] really saying is in 20 years' time, if it's necessary, he'd consider it ," he said.
"[This] really is, I guess, a classic stunt by the Premier.
"The reality is based on the report nuclear energy is not going to be viable in Australia for 20 to 30 years.
"It'd really be for the parliaments then to decide whether nuclear energy is in the best interest of Australia long-term to help fight greenhouse."
In other developments:
Australian consumers are being warned to expect a major increase in the cost of electricity if nuclear power and clean coal technologies are adopted. (Full Story)
Environmentalists fear the Northern Territory could end up hosting a high level radioactive waste repository if a nuclear energy industry is established in Australia. (Full Story)
Print Email