Ted O'Brien fires up over Coalition nuclear debate

With the Federal Election edging closer, the Opposition has opened the floodgates on its nuclear policy, with MP Ted O'Brien an enthusiastic spokesperson. Dr Lee Duffield writes.

AFTER TWO WEEKS of campaigning, news media started to complain seriously about “no detail” in Opposition policies. Then we had a flood of detail about nuclear that would not stop.

Fair-go media?

This is not to say that the service to the public from the news media is that analytical or informative. It is overall too lopsided for that, with the three-headed beast – News Corp, Sky News, 2GB network – running blatant close support for the Opposition, or just doing the attack work for them.

Social media is chaos, as always, though with interesting features. Labor is concentrating on it heavily, the Liberals catching up, systematically lining up trusties to write cloying comments. The ABC coverage is remarkably thorough this time over all its media networks, journalists sticking to the required protocols of fairness and distancing — only here and there some getting excited and becoming protagonists in their own interviews.

Nuclear memo to the L-NP: Less enthusiasm and more evidence

The Coalition has given no shortage of statements, headlines and talking points, but few answers to key questions regarding its nuclear policy.

Speaking of ABC, Sky News and Oppositionists getting a help-out from the conservative media troika, witness the performance of ex-ABC journalist, now Sky, Chris Uhlmann, in the debate between Energy Minister Chris Bowen and Opposition spokesman MP Ted O’Brien at the National Press Club on Thursday 10 April.

Uhlmann stepped into the debate to help O’Brien with efforts to flog the point about $275 reductions of annual power bills, giving his own speech to detail the Prime Minister’s persisting with the claim into last year. Bowen, following the card, not to get irritated, remarked that the Sky-man had been running his own campaign on the matter.

“Modelling” this, “modelling” that

That $275 is being made to go a long way. People will be talking: Have the Opposition parties got anything else? The figure was the result of “modelling”, which then got blown away by war in Ukraine and Gaza and other events hitting energy supply and the world economy. Was this projection, which was indeed played up mightily by the Labor Party, an actual “promise”? Can such things be promised and if so, is not subsidising household energy bills to make it be true a good effort at promise-keeping?

For the Opposition, a bundle of numbers and talk about “modelling” from O’Brien has boiled down to a claim that gas bills will drop 7%, and electricity ones 3% in the coming year, if he gets in as Minister. That seems to be what he is saying, and is the “modelling” outcome a “promise”?

Speaking of this Mr O’Brien: Election campaigns rightly bring us up to speed on who the Opposition have got on the front bench, what they are like, how good they are. Ted has had nine years in Parliament, including the chairing of some committees, but the novelty has not worn off; he has cropped up as that man who is extremely enthusiastic, not to say excited about nuclear power.

Very keen player

Mr O’Brien has had some trips overseas pursuing this intense, near-boyish interest and has definitely lined himself up with the nuclear power companies, though none have come forward to invest here. In the Opposition scheme, the Government would have to pay for the nuclear system — at least until they might sell it off, later, to somebody, as a nice little earner.

In any event, it has certainly powered up this Mr O’Brien, a relentless talking machine, very caught up, nobody else gets to speak.

Amidst the verbiage and confusion of numbers, we get the message: nuclear power production is so good that nothing can or should be said against it. Although, it might be agreed that future energy supply for the country, new industries and public safety are too substantial to be given over to the insecurities of some zealot acting like it’s a high school debate.

Dutton's nuclear disaster: Cheap lies and a $20 billion deficit

The Coalition's nuclear policy announcement comes with a massive price tag but is also built on disinformation.

Other ideas getting a look-in?

There have been some questions raised, which should not be shouted down, if you could get the man to show more curiosity, think, discuss. Contrary points: It’s the most expensive option; they haven’t started operating projected “new model” small reactor plants yet anywhere; it would be too late in Australia; it is dangerous, as in Fukushima, Three Mile Island, Chernobyl.

If the production of plutonium is involved, can reactors blow up? Some of the locations for these seven projected power stations are close to cities. How would an accident in the Hunter affect Newcastle or Sydney? How about ecology and the cooling water going into streams? It is touted as fitting in with existing infrastructure, but by the time it arrived, would the poles and cables not be ready for refurbishment already?

O’Brien may be getting misled by his mentors in the nuclear business about the economics of it. Given that the transition to renewables is getting a strong up-take, with over 30% of homes and businesses on solar, with economies of scale setting in, it would need to be competitive. The Opposition says the figure would be $330 billion. The Government insists on including the powering-up of millions of electric cars and with the time-lag, the conjoint need to keep old coal-fired stations going, getting the cost to $600 billion.

A figure of $233 billion has been raised, possibly a mental jumbling-up of $233 per MWh of nuclear-produced energy calculated by the national scientific agency, CSIRO.

Waste dump in Maroochydore?

Who gets the waste in Australia? Will it be buried in the coal mines, down with the water table, or precariously trucked along the highways and byways?

There will be Ted O’Brien’s backyard, of course, no objections there. He has some space at the back of his electoral office at 17 Southern Drive, Maroochydore, where they park cars — see picture. Bury it there for 250,000 years until the radioactivity is gone, we do hope. Ted, the Member of Parliament, would be pleased with this backyard feature, but maybe not so much all the surfers, retired folk and holiday makers on the Queensland Sunshine Coast. Who else wants this in their backyard?

Like others in the nuclear lobby, O’Brien often refers to “successful” projects overseas, including Ontario. In that province, as elsewhere, it is difficult to avoid information about cost overruns and delays, and a desperate shifting of losses onto other agencies and state budgets. Ontario is keeping electricity bills “cheap” through tax-payer subsidies of AU$8.4 billion a year.

For the record, Canada has five nuclear power stations (17 reactors) providing for 15% of needs, with eight reactors shut down and none under construction. If they had our sunshine in Ontario, would they do what we’re doing instead?

Amongst Dr Lee Duffield’s vast journalistic experience, he has served as ABC's European correspondent. He is also an esteemed academic and member of the editorial advisory board of Pacific Journalism Review and elected member of the University of Queensland Senate.