The opposition leader, Peter Dutton, claims his nuclear power plan would underpin local economies and energy security for “another 80, up to 100 years” – but the prime minister, Anthony Albanese, claims the Coalition’s long-awaited idea has “fallen apart within 24 hours”.
Questions remain about the cost, type, output and design of the reactors. There has been opposition from state premiers and from the owners of the proposed sites, who don’t plan to sell.
And confusion has reigned when it comes to consultation, with the Coalition giving three separate answers in 24 hours about whether communities would get a say over a nuclear plant being built in their back yard.
But the confusion dates back further than this week. We unpack the questions that remain about the Coalition’s plan – and how the current messaging compares with what has been said in the past.
Where’s the detail?
The Coalition announcement has been criticised for a lack of detail, although Dutton has said he was intentionally releasing information “in bite-sized bits” to avoid a “scare campaign”.
Labor MPs have relished the comparison to the Indigenous voice campaign and previous elections, where the Coalition demanded more detail about Labor’s plans and costings.
Speaking about the voice in August 2023, Dutton said: “Millions of Australians will want to know what it is they’re being asked to vote for, because it’s not going to provide practical outcomes.”
In January 2023, Dutton told Albanese in a letter: “In refusing to provide basic information and answer reasonable questions on the Voice, you are treating the Australian people like mugs… your approach will ensure a dangerous and divisive debate grounded in hearsay and misinformation.”
Labor MPs, including Julian Hill and Anne Aly, made tongue-in-cheek references to the Coalition’s voice referendum slogan “don’t know, vote no”.
“Where are the details?” Aly asked on social media this week.
Responding to a follower, Aly said: “I’m using it ironically! This is what Dutton said during the voice.”
Dutton on Friday said the costings would come “very soon”, but didn’t confirm whether it would be days, weeks or months.
The shadow home affairs minister, James Paterson, told ABC radio the Coalition “will provide the detail before Australians vote”. Asked how it would affect power bills, Paterson responded “we will tell you before you’re required to vote”.
In 2019, the then prime minister, Scott Morrison, called then Labor leader, Bill Shorten, “sneaky and tricky” for not giving costings of his proposed emissions reduction target.
“What Bill Shorten is refusing to do is tell you what his policies are and how much they are going to cost you,” Morrison claimed at the time.
Dutton himself told 2GB in May 2019 “[Shorten] can’t tell you how much it is going to cost you – don’t vote for it.”
A TV journalist’s repeated questioning of Shorten for the cost of his climate policies – which Shorten at the time declined to answer – became a major media moment in the 2019 federal election campaign. Taylor, the then energy minister, tweeted: “Is Bill Shorten being sneaky or clueless? If you don’t know what Labor’s climate policies will cost you, you can’t afford Bill Shorten”.
What kind of reactors?
The Coalition’s plan has morphed from focusing on small modular reactors – which aren’t in operation in any comparable nation – to a mix with larger reactors, to focusing mostly on large reactors.
Dutton on Wednesday spoke of products from Westinghouse, Hitachi and GE, and posted a photo of a Rolls-Royce SMR, but the exact types may be finalised as part of community consultation.
after newsletter promotion
The announcement included plans for five large reactors, and two “SMR only” proposals in Port Augusta and Collie.
It was a change from Dutton’s rhetoric in March 2023, when he told The Daily Aus: “I don’t support the establishment of big nuclear facilities here at all. I’m opposed to it.”
Will consultation take place – and how?
Documents circulated by Dutton’s office say a new agency – the Nuclear Energy Coordinating Authority – would “lead community consultation and manage a process to select experienced nuclear companies to partner with Government”. It envisages “regional deals” including jobs, infrastructure and integrated economic development zones to be negotiated with local communities.
But the form that consultation would take is unclear.
Confusion reigned on Wednesday, hours after the announcement, when the Nationals deputy leader, Perin Davey, indicated a nuclear plant wouldn’t go ahead if a community opposed it.
Shortly after, the party’s leader, David Littleproud, said she was wrong, and that the Coalition would “make the tough decisions” even if a town didn’t want a plant.
The shadow treasurer, Angus Taylor, gave another answer, saying on Thursday he wouldn’t deal with “hypotheticals”, despite two days earlier saying governments shouldn’t “force” energy projects against the wishes of local residents.
“When governments impose projects on communities, where there’s deep resentment and deep opposition, it doesn’t help us to get to where we need to go,” Taylor said, commenting on offshore windfarm proposals.
The deputy Liberal leader, Sussan Ley, stressed the nuclear plan included “close community consultation”, saying it would be “2.5 years of talking with the community about all of the details”.
Ley told 2HD radio it would include “detailed technical analysis and coming up with a preferred concept”, which suggests the community may be consulted on the particulars of the plant, not whether it actually wants one.
Dutton told Sky News: “We will consult about the benefits for those communities and how we can help revitalise some of those towns.”
Dutton’s insistence to press on, despite opposition from local communities and state premiers, seemed to extend to possible high court challenges. He also said, “Under the constitution, the commonwealth law overrides the state law to the extent of the inconsistency in the state law.”
To see the type of consultation the Coalition has previously backed, we could look to Ted O’Brien. He’s now opposition energy spokesperson, but in 2019, he was chair of a parliamentary report titled “Nuclear Energy – Not without your approval”.
In a media release at the time, O’Brien said: “Most importantly, the Australian people should be at the centre of any approval process.”
The report states: “The will of the people should be honoured by requiring broad community consent before any nuclear facility is built. That is, nuclear power plants or waste facilities should not be imposed upon local communities that are opposed to proposals relating to nuclear facilities presented to them.”
