Shock to Aboriginal Adnyamathanha Camp Law Mob – the selection of Barndioota as nuclear dump site

heartland-2

Response from the Adnyamathanha Camp Law Mob regarding the Federal Resources Minister’s announcement of 3 sites nominated for a nuclear waste dump in South Australia.

The Adnyamathanha Camp Law Mob are a group of Adnyamathna people who meet regularly to discuss issues relating to our land and culture.

The Camp Law mob share this message on behalf of all Adnyamathanha people and other South Australians who are opposed to any further expansion of the nuclear industry.  We have taken part in the SA Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission, and our views along with many others are clearly stated in our submission that we do not support any expansion of a nuclear industry this includes the imposition of a radioactive waste dump on Adnyamathana country at Barndioota.

We are shocked to hear on Friday 13th November 2015 that one of the 3 nominated sites in South Australia for a national nuclear waste dump is 377 Wallerberdina Road, Barndioota.  We understand that ex-Liberal Senator Grant Chapman is the current owner of the nominated site that is a Perpetual Lease property and therefore no native title claim can be lodged over this area.  It must still be governed according to the requirements of the Aboriginal Heritage legislation.

We demand that the Federal Resources Minister Josh Frydenberg publicly declare who he has consulted regarding these nomination, and who has the authority to nominate these si­tes.

We want to know who are the experts with local knowledge that took part in the advisory panel prior to these sites being nominated as waste sites?  Who are the Traditional Owners that took part in this process?  What Traditional knowledge from thousands of years of occupation has been incorporated into the decision-making?

Our involvement is this industry is nothing new. We were concerned by the government agreeing to uranium mining activities that have now permanently contaminated our land and our groundwater.   We want no further expansion of the nuclear industry and we will continue to fight for our rights as Traditional Owners in respect of the wisdom of our old people that came before us.

That’s what Traditional Owners do.  We care for our country.  We only wish governments and industries would do the same.  Stop playing with our future and care for our country.

Advertisements

8 Responses to “Shock to Aboriginal Adnyamathanha Camp Law Mob – the selection of Barndioota as nuclear dump site”

  1. BushTelegraph Says:

    Reblogged this on Workers BushTelegraph and commented:
    Federal government still not listening

    __oOo__

  2. Helen Phillips Says:

    I want to be guided by the traditional owners on this nuclear dumping issue.

    • Christina MacPherson Says:

      I understand your point of view.
      However, you are looking at it from a “local community rights” perspective. That would appear to be the best perspective. But I think it is time for us all to get past that perspective, certainly when it comes to an issue that affects not just a local community, but the whole nation.

      The establishment of a nuclear waste disposal site means making a place for the highly radioactive wastes now returning to Lucas Heights, from France. Sure, those might sit at Lucas Heights for a time, but thge rol eof this waste site is to take those Lucas Heights wastes, and more, returning to Australia from France, UK, Argentina.

      That means transporting them by sea. (Australia is legally bound to take them back), transporting them by road or rail across Australia, perhaps by sea for part of the journey. That means endangering every place that they pass. Most importantly, it also means continuing this toxic process, as more and more wastes are produced by the nuclear reactor at Lucas Heights.

      This is a matter that concerns all Australians, not just a local community – whether that community be black or white.

  3. Loyola Jones Says:

    My country is impacted by the proposed “Hale” site south of Alice Springs. I belong to the Kenny Family. This is our country. Our ancestors lived on this country and cared for it since time immemorial. We still live on this country. We still use this country for food and medicine. We still care for and protect our country. Its not just dirt! Say NO to proposed nuclear dump sites.

    From the wider perspective, we are doing our research. However you look at it, the prospect of ‘safely’ storing nuclear waste has inherent problems. Containment for example…in some cases this waste has life of thousands of generations. Current containment is unsafe in the short term (as is evidenced by reported incidents and accidents around the world)…..how then, do we put our faith in current methodology?

    The selected site will be the National facility. Storing ever growing amounts of low and intermediate grade nuclear waste…………….

    In solidarity!

  4. Diane King Says:

    The Government may have agreed to mine uranium and take back the waste for storage, but the People DID NOT. The Government does not own the land, it belongs to the Original Sovereign Tribes, who never ceded their Sovereignty to the Grown or the Government. The ‘Australian Government’ is a separate State, an administrative Corporation, who’s services can be dispensed with on your land, if that is what you want. Reasserting Sovereignty over your land is the way to regain control of your land and your future.
    Please learn about Sovereignty at the Sovereignty-Truth website:
    http://sovereignty-truth.net/about
    If government continues the acts of genocide and ‘crimes against humanity’ against you, such as removal of children, unwarranted incarcerations, removal of services and the creation of conditions designed to destroy in whole or in part, your tribe and your culture, severe mental and physical torture, you can ask the International Criminal Court to prosecute them by submitting a detailed complaint to:
    otp.informationdesk@icc-cpi.int

    Please note that they will only prosecute crimes of genocide and crimes against humanity committed after 2002, and there are strict criteria to be met for an investigation to take place. These are
    outlined in Article 6 and article 7 of the Rome Statute:

    ‘Genocide

    For the purpose of this Statute, “genocide” means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
    (a) Killing members of the group;
    (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

    (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

    (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

    (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

    Article 7

    Crimes against humanity

    1. For the purpose of this Statute, “crime against humanity” means any of the following acts when committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of the attack:
    (a) Murder;
    (b) Extermination;

    (c) Enslavement;

    (d) Deportation or forcible transfer of population;

    (e) Imprisonment or other severe deprivation of physical liberty in violation of fundamental rules of international law;

    (f) Torture;

    (g) Rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, enforced sterilization, or any other form of sexual violence of comparable gravity;

    (h) Persecution against any identifiable group or collectivity on political, racial, national, ethnic, cultural, religious, gender as defined in paragraph 3, or other grounds that are universally recognized as impermissible under international law, in connection with any act referred to in this paragraph or any crime within the jurisdiction of the Court;

    (i) Enforced disappearance of persons;

    (j) The crime of apartheid;

    (k) Other inhumane acts of a similar character intentionally causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or to mental or physical health.’

    You can download the Rome statute from the UN website. Here is a link to the Jurisdiction of the court:
    http://legal.un.org/icc/statute/romefra.htm

  5. Angela Says:

    The state that has the nuclear reactor, should take back it’s own waste, not dump it in someone else’s back yard.!!

  6. Christina MacPherson Says:

    New South Wales should acknowledge their responsibility for the Lucas Heights nuclear reactor. Its original purpose in the 1950s) was a prelude to Australia getting nuclear weapons.

    When that looked like not eventuating, the reactor stayed on as a foot in the door for the nuclear industry. The medical isotope function was an idea tacked on to give it more respectability. Recent developments in the particle accelerator – cyclotron making of medical isotopes are showing that a centralised nuclear reactor is now an out-dated way of making medical isotopes.

    Short-lived medical radioisotopes are much better made at hospital sites, close to where they will be used. That is presently an expensive system to set up, but in the longer term, clearly cheaper and more effective.

    Lucas Heights nuclear reactor should be shut down,, the returning radioactive wastes stored at Lucas Heights, and no more nuclear wastes should be made.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: