�鶹��ý

The federal Coalition has  about its plan to build seven nuclear power plants, at a cost of $331 billion over 25 years, across Australia.

But a new group, , is frustrating the Coalition’s attempt to downplay its policy, wanting it to ditch its nuclear policy before the election.

Spokesman and former Tasmanian Liberal director Andrew �Ұ��𲵲��Dz��� those involved are “desperate” for the Liberals to win government and are “not doing it out of malice or anger”.

�Ұ��𲵲��Dz���: “Nuclear power is the big road block preventing the Liberals getting to the Lodge. This is big government waste that betrays liberal values, splits the party, and hands Government back to Labor.”

He said the $331 billion nuclear policy “gives us bigger government, higher taxes to pay for it, more debt and less freedom as the state takes over energy production”.

Referring to differences on climate science and renewable energy, �Ұ��𲵲��Dz��� nuclear power is “a policy that fixes an internal problem but hangs a weight around the country’s neck for decades to come”.

Liberals Against Nuclear has a “significant” war chest to fund its advertising campaign, �Ұ��𲵲��Dz���, including television advertising, digital content and billboards.

Liberals Against Nuclear  the nuclear policy “is driving free market and middle ground voters directly to the Teals and other independents in must-win seats”. It added that polling shows just 35% support nuclear energy, “with support collapsing once voters understand the policy details”.

Liberals Against Nuclear “fundamentally contradicts core Liberal values of lower debt, smaller government, free markets, and less government intervention”.

It said the fact that the private market has said it won’t invest in building nuclear reactors and won’t insure it “speaks volumes”.

It said nuclear energy will require a new government agency and regulation, “adding unelected bureaucrats and tens of thousands of public servants to the government payroll”.

Security risks

The Liberals Against Nuclear  that the recent attempted attack at Chernobyl, when a drone loaded with explosives was flown onto the site, “illustrates that reactors are targets especially when waste is stored onsite”.

It cited an op-ed by the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, which pointed out that the “Opposition’s nuclear policy would increase defence risk” because “centralising power generation makes us more vulnerable to attacks including from China”.

The Australian Security Leaders Climate Group warned in February that the nuclear reactor plan would leave Australia  to missile warfare and sabotage. 

Retired Admiral Chris Barrie, former chief of the Australian Defence Force, : “Every nuclear power facility is a potential dirty bomb … Modern warfare is increasingly focused on missiles and uncrewed aerial systems and, with the proposed power stations all located within a 100 kilometres of the coast, they are a clear and accessible target.”

Cheryl Durrant, a former Department of Defence director, : “In the Ukraine-Russia war, both sides have given strategic priority to targeting their opponents’ energy systems, and Australia would be no different. So these nuclear facilities would necessitate expensive and complex missile defence systems as well as allocated cyber and counter-intelligence resources, making our security challenge more complex and expensive.”

Higher power bills

The Liberals Against Nuclear  had seven video advertisements referring to an estimated $665 increase in household power bills under the Coalition’s nuclear plan.

That figure may come from a study by the , which found that household electricity bills could rise by $665 a year on average, if nuclear energy were introduced. For a four-person household, the rise would be $972 per year.

A study by the  found that Dutton’s nuclear reactors would add $665 a year to the average non-solar household’s power bill, and that the rooftop solar systems of up to 12.5 million people would need to be shut off every day to allow nuclear to be shoe-horned into the system.

The most recent economic , conducted by global consultancy firm Jacobs for the Clean Energy Council, found that reliance on coal and gas while waiting for nuclear power would increase the average household bill by $449 a year, and an $877 rise for small businesses.

Most of the Liberals Against Nuclear advertisements quote Coalition MPs — current and former, federal and state — who oppose Dutton’s nuclear reactor plan.

���Ա��� former prime minister Malcolm Turnbull saying nuclear power is the most expensive form of electricity generation and asks if the Coalition “is trying to lose”.

���Դdzٳ����� state Liberal/Liberal National Party leaders opposed to nuclear power in Queensland, Western Australia, Victoria and South Australia.

Another NSW Liberal leader Mark Speakman saying that nuclear power is a trojan horse for the coal industry.

���Դdzٳ����� former NSW Liberal Deputy Premier Matt Kean, Queensland LNP Senator Matt Canavan and the CSIRO, saying nuclear power is twice as expensive as benign alternatives.

The John Howard government tried to go quiet on its policy of promoting nuclear power in the 2007 election and tried to paper over divisions within the Coalition. But at least 22 Coalition candidates publicly expressed concern, or outright opposition.

The nuclear power policy was ditched immediately after the Coalition lost that election.

[Dr Jim Green is the national nuclear campaigner with  and a member of the . Abridged from a longer piece on and published with permission.]