Senator Chapman, the Committee Chairman, addressed the Senate and because of the bipatisan nature of the report and his uniquely well-informed vantage point, we feature his remarks here. Though we depart from normal editorial practice in quoting such views so fully, they have particular relevance as the Jabiluka issue approaches its denouement, and as several other uranium mining projects emerge from the wings. The views expressed should not be taken as representing those of UIC staff or Directors.
"The report and the consequent government response represent a significant failure for the anti-uranium lobby, and that was reflected right through the conduct of this inquiry They were complacent and they faded to provide rigorous analysis of the evidence, and that was because they were significantly out of date. The anti-uranium lobby that participated - both as members of this committee and as those who presented their submissions to this committee - were locked in the arguments of the 1970s. They had not updated their information and they had not updated their knowledge. That has been reflected in the minority report and, quite properly, it has been reflected in the response the govermnent has provided to the report which was handed down by the majority of the committee.
"The perspective of those who were engaged in opposing uranium mining was essentially a political perspective. They looked for evidence that supported their arguments, rather than assessing the evidence on the broad base of the information that was provided. Indeed, they did not look at all at what was reasonable and supportable in the evidence; they only looked for evidence which supported their side of the case. Another aspect of the minority in this inquiry was that their interest was always limited to the bad news (which) suited their particular case - and that was when they bothered to turn up." One of the authors of "the minority report was notable by her absence for most of that inquiry. Those who opposed uranium mining were very limited in their application."
"The positive thing about uranium mining in Australia over the last 20 years of its operation is that it has built up a very favourable credit ledger and that was clearly shown in the evidence presented to the committee. It has built up a favourable credit ledger with regard to economic gains for Australia and with regard to the fact that mining and milling have been conducted with minimal impact on the environment. That was particular attested too by the evidence of the Supervising Scientist with regard to mining in the Kakadu region.
"Uranium mining has also built up a very strong credit balance with regard to the high and increasingly stricter health and safety standards in the conduct of mining, and the similarly strict standards in ensuring that Australian uranium is used for civil purposes alone and is not diverted for military use. That is a substantial achievement on the part of the Australian uranium mining industry, and it was that credible record that led the committee to come down with the recommendations we have put to government. Those recommendations were supported by five of the seven committee members including the members of the major opposition, the Labor Party.
"I would say that the anti-uranium campaign in this country is certainly dead and remains only to be buried. It is not only that the numbers are not there in the community to support the anti-uranium position; the main point is that there is no evidence to support the arguments they put. In the light of modem experience, the facts simply do not stand up and (indicate) that we should oppose uranium mining in this country.
"One of the key conclusions which the select committee reached was that
the findings of the (1 970s) Fox inquiry (allowing uranium mining to proceed)
had been vindicated by the evidence of the 20 years experience of mining.
Indeed, the Fox inquiry overstated the possibility of damage to the Australian
environment as a result of uranium mining. All the evidence that has built
up over the 20 years since that inquiry, and since uranium mining has been
actively undertaken in this country, shows that even the fairly minimal
damage that was expected by the findings of the Fox inquiry had not been
fulfilled, and there had been no long-term damage to the Australian environment
at all as a result of this activity being undertaken."